User:Moiramora131/Abortion in Kenya/Solrprstge 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? Moiramora131
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: Abortion in Kenya

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer? No I do not think so. It seems the same as when I checked it two weeks ago.
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Yes, it delineates what the article is about and briefly how it affects the subject.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? No, it does not mention legislative policy or statistics only the effects of the lack of abortion briefly.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? No, only the facts mentioned in the article.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? It is very concise with only base information.

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic? Yes, it stays on topic when discussing Abortion in Kenya and the implications of the topic.
 * Is the content added up-to-date? Yes, most of the references are from 2019 and 2020 with the exception of two from 2018, one from 2015, and one from 2010.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? It would be beneficial to have a “context” section to discuss the cultural relative issues that add to the tension of abortion and sources of unwanted pregnancies in greater detail.

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral? Yes, there was very little to no biased statements.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? No, all information was stated as a report of information rather than a personal summary of information (that would have bias).
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? The viewpoint most represented was that of the government's interpretation of abortion and the sexual harassment.
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? No, instead it states the facts and governmental information. However, the facts on their own do invoke empathy and an emotional response for the women who are suffering.

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Yes, all of the information comes from either articles via the news, academic journals, or governmental sources.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? Yes, they examine the issues in Kenya regarding abortion and female safety.
 * Are the sources current? While many are current sources dating from 2018-2020, there are two sources dating to 2015 and 2010.
 * Check a few links. Do they work? Links 1, 2, and 7 do not work as the pages themselves were either taken down or error out.

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? Yes, it provides a concise and clear with the information without showing explicit bias.
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors? The “P” in Legislative policy needs to be capitalized as it is a title. Other than that, there was no explicit grammatical errors that I could locate.
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Yes, however, the “African Population and Health Research Center” has a link that takes the viewer to an editing mode. To resolve this, either delete the link or create the page as not to confuse a reader. The video gives context and visual support to the article. It would be beneficial to have a “context” section to discuss the cultural relative issues that add to the tension of abortion and sources of unwanted pregnancies in greater detail.

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


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? Yes, there is a video that explains the content of wiki article and allows for further explanation of the topics mentioned in the article.
 * Are images well-captioned? Yes, there is a brief caption.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? As it is a video from the Wikipedia commons, it adheres to the copyright regulations.
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? Yes, it is up and to the side.

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? It had a decent amount of information, however, there needed to be more information on the medical and cultural side of the abortions in Kenya to allow for a more complete article.
 * What are the strengths of the content added? It is very factual and unbiased.
 * How can the content added be improved? More cultural context and information besides statistics and governmental information.