User:Pioneer Rose/Neo-charismatic movement/Macleandkirk 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? Pioneer Rose
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: User:Pioneer Rose/Neo-charismatic movement

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer? It looks like the lead has remained the same, but it is effective.
 * 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, as it is strictly informative.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? NO.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? It is very concise.

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic? Yes.
 * Is the content added up-to-date? I know that the "History and prominent figures" section describes some of the founders and early leaders, but maybe it would be helpful to include some information about prominent figures in the movement that are active today.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? It could be helpful to hyperlink George Otis Junior (if he has a Wikipedia), and maybe include a little more information on spiritual mapping if available (just kidding, I see that is done below).

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral? Yes.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? I think that, considering its importance in Africa, Asia, and Latin America, you could explain some important figures here.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? It may be a little American-centric. Maybe bring up some leaders outside America to represent some of non-American contributions.
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? No.

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, the sources are very thorough. The bibliography is very robust and effective, but some need hyperlinks.
 * Are the sources current? Yes, most sources utilized were written in the last 15 years.
 * Check a few links. Do they work? All links that I tried work.

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? The content is very concise.
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors? Capitalize Protestant in the lead. Second sentence of history section could be a little clearer I think. Other than that, I did not find anything.
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Yes, its very well organized. I think it is very helpful to have the list of notable churches at the end.

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 pictures. I would recommend adding some photos of their services if you can find them. It could also be helpful to add a picture of an important figure, such as Wagner.
 * Are images well-captioned? Not applicable.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? Not applicable.
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? Not applicable.

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete? The article is much more complete now. The original did not nearly as robust of a history. Furthermore, the original article is completely American-centric. It does not consider the Neo-charismatic movement in any other region. The author of the updated Wikipage also explains the notable practices in greater detail.
 * What are the strengths of the content added? The content added is much more detailed.
 * How can the content added be improved? I think that it could be improved by pictures of the practices so that the audience can really visualize what is taking place.

Overall evaluation
Overall, this revised article is very strong. So many details are added that make it feel much more complete than the original article. There are very few errors, and you did a lot of justice to groups outside of America that participate in the Neo-charismatic movement. My only suggestion is that you just add a little bit more about those groups. I also think that this article could be improved if you included some pictures (if you can find some). Great work, my suggestions are very minor which indicates that you did a great job.