User:MrrrAndersonnn/Internet Poverty In New Hampshire (Initial Draft Outline)/PaigeCarmichael1 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? MrrrAndersonnn
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: User:MrrrAndersonnn/sandbox

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer?
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?

Lead evaluation
Very good lead, like the way you introduced the topics without giving too much information right away. This is a strong section.

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic?
 * Is the content added up-to-date?
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?

Content evaluation
All of the content added seems relevant and up to date. I do not see any obvious gaps but listed a few possible additions below.

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral?
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?

Tone and balance evaluation
There is good balance in the article now, but it might be interesting to cite popular arguments for and against some of the policies you mentioned in the 'Policy Solutions' section.

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Are the sources current?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Sources and references evaluation
You have a significant number of sources and all the links I checked worked.

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?

Organization evaluation
Content is very clearly written and concise.

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


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?

Images and media evaluation
I like the image you have but unfortunately one seems to have been removed for legal reasons.

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?

New Article Evaluation
Very good job of linking a variety of sources as well as existing Wikipedia articles.

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete?
 * What are the strengths of the content added?
 * How can the content added be improved?

Overall evaluation
This is an interesting topic that you did a good job covering for this Wikipedia article. I have a few minor suggestions for things you could add, but the content in the article now stands alone fine without these additions, they are just suggestions.

-Examples of policy options discussed in the state previously and how people agreed or disagreed with it

-A more detailed explanation of the sources you mention in the connections to poverty sections. It seems like there are several sources discussing that and the sections could have some more detail about what is discussed.

-Table of different income levels in state regions (maybe median income levels)

Overall a very well written article!