User:Mschott1/Catharine Macfarlane/KHuckaby1920 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? MSCHOTT1
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: User:Mschott1/Catharine Macfarlane

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
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? YES
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? I DON'T THINK SO
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? IT'S BALANCED REALLY WELL

Lead evaluation
GOOD JOB WITH THE LEAD, IT SUMMARIZES THE ARTICLE WELL AND COVERS ALL THE IMPORTANT BITS.

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
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics? YES, IT COVERS A WOMAN SCIENTIST. I HAVEN'T HEARD OF HER BEFORE.

Content evaluation
THE CONTENT IS GREAT. IT'S EASY TO FOLLOW AND I LEARNED A LOT ABOUT CATHERINE MACFARLANE. IF POSSIBLE I WOULD FLUSH IT OUT MORE, ADDING MORE DETAILS. SOME OF WHAT WAS MENTIONED IN THE INTRO WASN'T GIVEN A LOT OF DETAIL IN THE BODY PARAGRAPHS IT WAS JUST MENTIONED AGAIN. IT'S HARD TO FIND RESEARCH THOUGH SO NO WORRIES IF THERE ISN'T MORE DATA. :)

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral? YES
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? NO, I WOULD EDIT THIS SENTENCE HOWEVER "Macfarlane claimed to be inspired by her mother to enter into the medical field" WHEN IT SAYS 'CLAIMED' IT READS A BIT LIKE IT'S NOT BELIEVED OR TRUE. MAYBE SAY SOMETHING LIKE 'Macfarlane was inspired by her mother to enter the medical field. OR 'Macfarlane credits her mother as the inspiration for going into the medical field.'
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? NO
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? NO

Tone and balance evaluation
THE TONE IS GREAT! IT DIDN'T FEEL LIKE IT WAS TRYING TO BE PERSUASIVE.

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? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible? YES, FOR THE MOST PART
 * Check a few links. Do they work? YES

Sources and references evaluation
GOOD JOB WITH SOURCES

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? NOT THAT I FOUND
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? YES

Organization evaluation
ORGANIZATION LOOKS GREAT

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


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

Images and media evaluation
SEE IF YOU CAN FIND ANY IMAGES THAT YOU CAN ADD INTO YOUR ARTICLE. IF NOT, NO WORRIES. IT CAN BE HARD TO FIND THE RIGHT IMAGES

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
N/A

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete? YES, WHAT YOU ADDED FLESHED OUT A LOT OF THE ORIGINAL ARTICLE, ADDED IN SOME DETAILS. YOU ALSO REDID A TON OF THE ORIGINAL INFORMATION TO BE ORGANIZED BETTER. IT DOES APPEAR TO BE A LOT OF THE SAME INFORMATION JUST REDONE? I'M ALSO SUPER TIRED THOUGH AND MIGHT BE MISSING A LOT. EITHER WAY, YOU DID A GREAT JOB!
 * What are the strengths of the content added? I LIKE THAT YOU ADDED MORE ABOUT HER EARLY LIFE AND HER MOM INSPIRING HER. I ALSO LIKE THAT YOU ROUNDED OUT THE AWARDS SECTION.
 * How can the content added be improved? I WOULD ONLY ADD A BIT MORE DETAILS IF YOU CAN FIND THEM, OTHERWISE IT LOOKS GREAT!

Overall evaluation
YOU DID A GREAT JOB!