User:Mobinwang/Feminism in China/RunzeY 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? RunzeY
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: User:Mobinwang/Feminism in China

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer? It does include something original.
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? There is no theme that clearly introduced the article.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? No, it did not illustrate the structure of the article through description.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? No
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? Concise

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic? Yes, it maps the political and social milieu of China as feminism was introduced.
 * Is the content added up-to-date? Yes.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? No
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? No
 * Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?Yes

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral? Yes, but it can be more neutral when by presenting facts first and conclusions of the scholars later.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? No
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? Viewpoint over represented would be the phenomenon of leftover women. Bringing together several feminist topics using the novel compound word 剩女is a nice touch, but I feel like this paragraph can connect to something major or more grandeur instead of clinging to leftover woman(I mean, it is definitely a very good starting point).
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? The wording in some of the sentences appears to be persuasive.For example, “there was even a film...”. Presenting fact without emphasis in tone will add to credibility.

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Yes
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? Yes
 * Are the sources current? Yes
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Yes
 * Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible? 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
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors? Few
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Yes

Images and Media
Guiding questions: If your peer added images or media


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? No
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?

For New Articles Only
If the draft you're reviewing is a new article, consider the following in addition to the above.


 * Does the article meet Wikipedia's Notability requirements - i.e. Is the article supported by 2-3 reliable secondary sources independent of the subject?
 * How exhaustive is the list of sources? Does it accurately represent all available literature on the subject?
 * Does the article follow the patterns of other similar articles - i.e. contain any necessary infoboxes, section headings, and any other features contained within similar articles?
 * Does the article link to other articles so it is more discoverable?

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete? Yes, as it presented new perspectives.
 * What are the strengths of the content added? It filled up the void of the 20th century void of coverage in China’s feminism
 * How can the content added be improved? Improve the tone of writing will be of help.