User:Raizaj24/Gender diversity/Fabiola Zayas 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?

Raizaj24


 * Link to draft you're reviewing:

User:Raizaj24/Gender diversity

Lead
Guiding questions:

Yes, the lead has been improved.
 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer?


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?

It does but, it can still be improved maybe if in the first sentence and the second becomes one sentence, it can cover more ground of what the article is trying to communicate.

No, it covers all the information in the article and the one added.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?

This article is concise and clear
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?

Content
Guiding questions:

The content added is relevant to the topic and important to know because it helps you as a reader to fully understand the concept. On the contrary! '''This article addresses information that is not talked about very often. I like the way it also brings an example of where there is underrepresentation in our daily world ex: school, work, STEM ...'''
 * Is the content added relevant to the topic?
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?


 * Is the content added up-to-date?
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:

'''A little bit, just some parts of this article may be seen as biased. (Gender diversity in the workplace)'''
 * Is the content added neutral?
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?

Sources and References
Guiding questions:

I feel that the lead needs some references. Three of them do not work.
 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Are the sources current?
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * 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?

It has minors grammatical errors. Yes, it is well organized and follow a pattern, like a chain between topic make it easier to understand.
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?

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


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * 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:

'''Yes! The content that has been added makes the article feel more complete and more to day, the information complements and improve one another.''' The content was clear because It uses terms that everyone can understand however they are also explained, so if you are not familiar with the topic you get all the answers to your questions in the article that is also well written, and engaging. '''I feel that some graphics showing the data mentioned may be helpful for visuals, and accuracy. Addin some people that have suffered from a not fair representation or treatment (included pictures and information about them) or creating a section of movements/activism and laws may be nice.'''
 * 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?