User:Ramcharitar30/Rita Mae Brown/BecksZimberg 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? (Ramcharitar30)
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: Rita Mae Brown

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer?
 * No
 * 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?
 * The Lead does not include a brief description of the major sections that can be found in the article
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * Due to the conciseness of the Lead, everything that is written in this section appears in the article.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * The Lead for this article is extremely concise, gets right to the point about what the article is about while providing an overview of who it is.

Lead evaluation
there were no edits made to this article it seems by the person who I was assigned, so I was not able to give them the proper evaluation.

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic?
 * Since there was no real content added to this article, I was not able to respond in that aspect. However, the content that is already on this page is relevant.
 * Is the content added up-to-date?
 * Since there was no real content added to this article, I was not able to respond in that aspect. However, the content that is already on this page is up to date.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * No

Content evaluation
Overall, the content that already exists on this page is relevant and up-to-date. I would not say that there is anything missing or out of context in this article.

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral?
 * Since there was no content added, I can not respond in that aspect, but the information that is already here is in fact neutral.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * No
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * With the information that is already present in this article, I would say that the information that is overrepresented in a way is the focus on her philosophical and/or political views.
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * Since there was no content added, I cannot respond in that aspect, but the information that is already here does not have any type of biased perspective.

Tone and balance evaluation
Overall, the information that is present in this article is form a neutral perspective with a focus on her philosophical and political point of view.

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * N/A
 * 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
Overall, the resources and references that are available on this article are relevant to the subject matter with accessible links for readers to use.

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?
 * No
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * Yes

Organization evaluation
Overall, this article is well organized with clear categorical sections that readers of the article can navigate towards for certain bits of information that they are looking for.

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


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

Images and media evaluation
there was nothing for me to evaluate in this portion of the article because there were no images used.

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?
 * N/A, nothing was added to this article by student.
 * What are the strengths of the content added?
 * N/A, nothing was added to this article by student.
 * How can the content added be improved?
 * N/A, nothing was added to this article by student.

Overall evaluation
overall, I had to base this evaluation on information that was already on this page, unfortunately my partner never added new information to this article