User:PlatypusJam/Visual Communications/Team eggboy 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

 * This is a peer review of PlatypusJam’s edits on the Visual Communications Wikipedia page.
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: Visual Communications

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content?
 * The lead has been specified and they have added citations and references to the lead.
 * 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?
 * yes!
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * It is daily considered. Not overly detailed, however there are not too many references to the lead section.

Lead evaluation
The edits made were minor content wise, however, the editor made the wording more clear and specified certain sentences.

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?

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, has basic exposition
 * 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?
 * Not as much as it could be.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * yes! Two academic papers.
 * Are the sources current?
 * Yes!
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

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?
 * yes!
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * yes!

Organization evaluation
The lead gives a great overview, and the sections are very to the point.

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


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * No
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?

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?
 * What are the strengths of the content added?
 * How can the content added be improved?