User:Ryanliou/Quadratic voting/Lindseyjli3 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? Ryanliou
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: User:Ryanliou/sandbox

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer?
 * Yes, the Lead has been updated to reflect the new content added.
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Yes, the Lead includes an introductory sentence that describes the article's topic.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * Yes, the Lead includes a brief description of the article's major sections.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * No, the Lead doesn't include information that isn't present in the article.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * Yes, the Lead is concise and clear.

Lead evaluation

 * The Lead was really well-written and included a small introduction for the topics being included further along in the draft. I liked how the Lead was concise and how there was a background section as well to provide some detail about the topic's history.

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic?
 * Yes, the content added is relevant to the topic.
 * Is the content added up-to-date?
 * Yes, the content added is current.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * No, there doesn't seem to be content that is missing or doesn't belong.
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?
 * The article doesn't seem to deal with Wikipedia's equity gaps nor does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics.

Content evaluation

 * Overall, the content was really clear and easy to read!

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral?
 * For the most part, the content is neutral.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * There is a claim in the "Development in Democratic Parties" that seem to be biased towards a particular position.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * For the most part, the viewpoints are discussed evenly.
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * The content added seems to persuade the reader in favor of one position in a certain section, specifically the "Development in Democratic Parties" section in the sentence "it isn't fair for the minorities."

Tone and balance evaluation

 * Overall, the article draft maintained a neutral and unbiased POV. However, there was one particular section that seemed a little biased in the "Development in Democratic Parties" section. It's important to maintain a neutral POV and tone so that readers are able to form their own ideas and opinions about the topic. While Ryan may think that "it isn't fair for the minorities," not ever individual will perceive it that way.

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Yes, the new content is supported by reliable sources.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Yes, the sources are thorough.
 * Are the sources current?
 * Yes, the sources for the most part are current.
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * Yes, the sources are written by a range of authors and don't seem to include historically marginalized individuals.
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * Yes, the links work!

Sources and references evaluation

 * Overall, the sources are great! They seem reliable and relevant to the topic.

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Yes, the content is well-written and easy to read.
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * No, the content doesn't have any grammar or spelling errors.
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * Yes, the content is well-organized and broken down into several sections with headings.

Organization evaluation

 * The draft was really organized and had a really clear structure to it! I liked how you included headings before each new section because it made it easier on the readers' end to distinguish a change in topic and navigate it.