User:Mmedich01/Fabiola Gianotti/SMC2021 Peer Review

Peer review
This is where you will complete your peer review exercise. Please use the following template to fill out your review.

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing? Mmedich01
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: User:Mmedich01/Fabiola Gianotti

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer? Yes
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Yes, I really liked your introductory sentence, there were a couple of grammatical errors so just watch out for those.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? Yes. The article is separated into different sections with clear headings.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? Yes, she helped filled in some extra awards and also added information that made the article flow better and make it easier to understand.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? The lead is concise. There is little repetition.

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic? Yes.
 * Is the content added up-to-date? Yes.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? No.

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral? Yes, it states the facts and did not have a biased tone.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? No.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? No, everything added made sense. I would recommend you either add more to the comic sans paragraph or remove it all together. It feels slightly out of place.
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? No.

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Yes, everything was cited.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? Yes, some of the articles looked like they might have been biased in nature, but the information presented was neutral.
 * Are the sources current? For the most part yes.
 * Check a few links. Do they work? Yes.

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? Yes. The information you added helped create a better introduction. The original article went right into her career without giving a short summary but you did.
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors? There are a couple.
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Yes.

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete? Yes.
 * What are the strengths of the content added? The content added gave better context for understanding who your scientist is quickly.
 * How can the content added be improved? Add a little bit more on her awards and consider removing the comic sans paragraph.