User:Roshnispatel/The Black Vampyre (short story)/Amberericam 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? Roshnispatel
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: User:Roshnispatel/The Black Vampyre (short story)

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer? yes
 * 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? I think its concise

Lead evaluation
The lead is very short, sweet and to the point. Perfect for someone who just needs a quick overview of what the page's topic is.

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic? Yes
 * Is the content added up-to-date? Yes
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? No

Content evaluation
The content of the page is very good in each of the sections. Each section is solely speaking on that topic and not intertwining the sections. I like it because it makes it easy to navigate the page and go to exactly what i need when looking at information. The history section is very useful to understand the setting of the story.

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
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? No

Tone and balance evaluation
The tone and balance is really good. I didn't feel like i was being forced to believe the story was interpreted a certain way. You guys had the facts and the history there as a suggestion to help understand the root of the story.

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
 * Are the sources current? yes
 * Check a few links. Do they work? yes

Sources and references evaluation
All of the sources are newer which is good because they are recent and more reliable because thing can change a lot over time. They are all relevant to the topic that is talked aobut when using them.

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? not that i could find
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? yes

Organization evaluation
The organization is very good, everything has its own section and there isn't too much information in one section alone. I personally found it easy to read and understand, im not one to enjoy things that i have to read 5 and 6 times to understand what its saying.

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


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? yes
 * Are images well-captioned? yes
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? yes
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? yes

Images and media evaluation
I like the image that you guys uploaded. I have been working to find a good one for my groups page. I feel like the photo ties the whole page together.

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? yes
 * How exhaustive is the list of sources? Does it accurately represent all available literature on the subject? yes
 * 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? yes
 * Does the article link to other articles so it is more discoverable? yes

New Article Evaluation
The set up is really nice and i like each section heading. Its simple but has all the information. You have great sources linked to check out for even more information.

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete? yes
 * What are the strengths of the content added? Very organized and easy to understand
 * How can the content added be improved? Just finishing the themes section

Overall evaluation
I like this page overall, i think it resembles a real wiki page so far. The themes page just needs to be finished but you guys know that.