User:Omt2e/People in the Room/Brady956 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? Omt2e
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: User:Omt2e/People in the Room

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? It does not say much regarding the themes or background sections.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? Yes, regarding the award the book won.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? Concise

Lead evaluation
Overall good, I would maybe work on making the sentence structure a little smoother.

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? Maybe a section for see also including the author, the painting, and other relevant wikis

Content evaluation
Good, love the amount of referencing you have.

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral? yes
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? No
 * 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
Great job with neutral writing.

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
 * Check a few links. Do they work? Yes

Sources and references evaluation
Sources are relevant and appropriate.

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? There are some unclear sentences in each section.
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors? Yes, there are some grammatical errors, namely in the Themes section. The third sentence is a fragment.
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Yes

Organization evaluation
No major grammar errors, just needs some editing.

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


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? yes
 * Are images well-captioned? yes
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? The photo is from wikimedia commons, but it states that there might be copyright claims against wikimedia for the image.
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? Yes, I like the image on the left side.

Images and media evaluation
Good, I hope that wikimedia doesn't get claimed for it.

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? Yes
 * How exhaustive is the list of sources? Does it accurately represent all available literature on the subject? Yes, there are many different sources.
 * 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? Yes.
 * Does the article link to other articles so it is more discoverable? Yes

New Article Evaluation
Looks professional.

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete? Yes
 * What are the strengths of the content added? Makes the article look like some that are already published.
 * How can the content added be improved? Just some editing.

Overall evaluation
Great job boys keep honing it in.