User:Pearl748/2019–20 coronavirus pandemic on social media/Kieranmitha98 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) - Pearl748
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic on social media

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer? Yes the lead shows the new information added
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Yes it states whats in the article
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? The lead talks about the topic
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? There lead states things that arent mentioned later in the article
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? It is very general

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic? It is relevant somewhat to the topic
 * Is the content added up-to-date? The content is up to date as the topic is current and on going
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? There is content that needs to be published thats in tune with the lead

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral? yes the content is neutral
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? not a all
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? There arent really any viewpoints made clear
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? No its unbiased

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? There are sources for all infomation
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? They are relevant
 * Are the sources current? The sources are current with the topic
 * 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? Easy to read but not enough content
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors? Not that I can notice
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? There are separate sections

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 no images included
 * Are images well-captioned? No images
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? No images
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? No 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?

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete? The content provided adds to the article but does not fulfill the article
 * What are the strengths of the content added? Gives a general description of the topic
 * How can the content added be improved? More content is needed

Overall evaluation
Good start and has potential for more content. More evidence and content will make the article stronger and give the reader a better understanding