User:Mortrick/Benjamin Griffith Brawley/Sarahpanico 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? (provide username)-Mortrick
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: Benjamin Griffith Brawley

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer?- Yes it has been updated
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?- There is an introductory sentence. It talks about who he was and why he is notable.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?- It does this.There is a content box that shows links to all six sections.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?- The information is found also in the article.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?- The lead is concise. I think that it shows all the most important and relevant information and provides context.

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic?- Yes, all information helps add to the readers understanding of the topic. I think that this helps we understand Brawley and his life better.
 * Is the content added up-to-date?- All information is up to data and accurate. The subject of the page is deceased so there is no new information on him.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?- I felt like the article was very thorough but I think there could be more information on his writings. I feel that maybe there could be an overview of each one and a plot summary.
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?- Yes this deals with equity gaps and underrepresented populations and topics.
 * Content evaluation- The content was overall very good, relevant, and important. My only note is that I want to know more about his writings.

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral?- The content was neutral, I did not see any opinion anywhere in the article
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?- There were no biased claims that I found. I saw only the statement of facts.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?- I think that this is a balanced article. I do not feel that any viewpoint was over or underrepresented.
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?- The content does not attempt to persuade it is neutral.

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?- Yes all of the information was backed up by reliable secondary sources. I saw no unsubstantiated claims or incorrect information.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?- Yes the sources are thorough and they cover the information. I found them to be reputable.
 * Are the sources current?- Yes
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?- Yes the sources are diverse and included marginalized individuals.
 * 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 writing style was to the point, concise, and well written.
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors?- I saw no errors in terms of spelling and/ or grammar.
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?- There are sections that go over different topics Brawley and his life/ work. They are all relevant and help break down the article.

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


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?-There are pictures of Brawley, as well as Howard University and Moorehouse College. I think that the picture of Brawley is most relevant. The other photos are not necessary but add to the article.
 * Are images well-captioned?- Yes it identifies the subject of the picture
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?- yes
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?- The image is laid out in a visually appealing way, they correspond to what is being discussed in the text.

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 the article now has more information and gives a better overview of Brawley. The article is now more thorough.
 * What are the strengths of the content added?- The information helped with the background on Brawley. There is more detail and specifics.
 * How can the content added be improved?- I think the article could talk more about Brawley's writings, and what. they were about. Many were just listed with no context.
 * Overall evaluation- Great job this is a very good article. The information was important and I am glad that this article is helping to make wiki more diverse.