User:Remycrowley/Mary Guinan/Korianh 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? Remycrowley
 * Link to draft you're reviewing:Mary Guinan

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * 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?
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?

Lead evaluation

 * I'm not sure if the lead specifically has been edited yet, but looking at the page's edit history there definitely has been some work done on the article
 * The first sentence is a cohesive summary, however it is a little lengthy. A more concise leading sentence would be stronger here.
 * The lead does not have a brief overview of the major contents yet
 * no, the lead does not have any info that is not present in the topic
 * the lead is concise.

The first sentence of the lead is a bit wordy, but the rest of it seems concise enough. Adding the overview of content could be a good start to editing this section.

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?
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?

Content evaluation

 * Yes, the content is relevant.
 * I am not sure it is all up to date. The last date I see is 2004
 * The work history section is not super relevant or could at least be changed into paragraph form rather than structured like a resume
 * The article covers a woman in STEM, which is underrepresented, but may not fall into Wikipedia's equity gaps

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * 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?

Tone and balance evaluation
Overall, the article reads as neutral and unbiased with and does not attempt to persuade the reader in favor of any positions. Keep this up throughout your editing!

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * 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?

Sources and references evaluation
The source all seem to be reliable and the links are working, which is good. There appears to be a good balance of source types, but some more peer reviewed sources could be a good addition.

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * 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?

Organization evaluation
There aren't any major grammatical errors, but the article could use restructuring. There are sections of content that could be grouped and some that need to be revamped entirely (like the work history section). The article is interesting and engaging but does not flow very well.

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?

Images and media evaluation
There are no images! This could be a great addition if you can find some

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?

Overall evaluation
Overall, the article is a good read! The only major things to fix would be the section about her work history, which is written like a resume. The article could also be reorganized in a way that flows better.