User:Ruy043/China and the World Bank/Na0umi1901 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? (provide username): Ruy043
 * Link to draft you're reviewing:

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer?
 * Yes, the content that they present is clear and relates to the content.
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Yes, the Lead talks about China and their struggles with the World Bank leading to the creation of the New Development Bank.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * No, but it does make a good claim.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * No, the Lead is a good representation of what the article is about.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * No, the lead is concise and easy to follow.

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic?
 * Yes, the content is relative to the topic providing necessary background information.
 * Is the content added up-to-date?
 * Yes, the content has references that are not out of date. Most of the references come from within the past five or so years.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * No, there is no content missing.

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?

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Yes, the content is backed up by reliable sources.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * The sources seem to be thorough although there is one reference to an Op-Ed.
 * Are the sources current?
 * Yes, the sources mainly comes from this past year or just a couple years off.
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * Yes, the links work.

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * It is well written and follows easily. There is a good amount of necessary background information.
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * It would not hurt to double check for spelling and grammar.
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * It is well organized and broken down into sections that do make sense.

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


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * No, it would be interesting to add media.
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * There are no images.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * There are no images.
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * There are no images.

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, the article supports Wikipedia's Notability requirements
 * How exhaustive is the list of sources? Does it accurately represent all available literature on the subject?
 * It is not too exhaustive and most of it pertains to the topic of the article.
 * 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?
 * It does, for example the section on the History of China is really helpful to add.
 * Does the article link to other articles so it is more discoverable?
 * No.

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete?
 * Yes, the article does seem complete without having too much information on background and a good amount on the actual topic.
 * What are the strengths of the content added?
 * How can the content added be improved?

Overall evaluation
sign username: Na0umi1901