User:Shadowknight1109/Renewable energy law/Iddibass123 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
I am reviewing Shadowknight1109 sandbox whose main topic is Renewable Energy law, but is working on the subtitle renewable energy lawyers.

User:Shadowknight1109/sandbox - Wikipedia

Lead evaluation
Shadowknight1109 draft starts of explaining info on what is his section? and what does the subject he chose do? However, the article topic is Renewable energy law and he doesn't introduce the article's topic. But his information is accurate and not overly- detailed.

Content evaluation
I don't know if his content is up to date but everything he has written belongs there, nothing sounds bias or sound like it doesn't belong there. H e clearly explains the content and the goal of why it was created.

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:

Tone and balance evaluation
The person's paragraph sounds neutral and only sounds like he is trying to inform us by stating different occupations the lawyers try to help. Since he gives information of what these lawyers do and gives examples too, they were no persuasion.

Sources and References
Guiding questions:

Sources and references evaluation
All three sources are reliable sources, two of them is mainly about renewable energy or alternative energy for the environment, and the last source is about different laws and lawyers in the country. His references is similar to his links. His links work well. And they all look like secondary source provided by the website.

Organization
Guiding questions:

Organization evaluation
The paragraph has a lot of vocabularies but once you read it several times, in addition to reading the beginning of the article so you can get the sense of what the article is about then you'll be able to understand. He even gives links to other wiki page in his writing so you can be able to understand his topic even more (ex: clean tech laws). There are no grammatical errors that I've seen. He startsoff stating what these lawyers are focusing on, their goal. Then explains finally what these layers are, what they do, and examples.

Images and media evaluation
There was no images or media presented in the sandbox draft.

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 evaluation
Overall, the the content is good and now that it has been added I would say the quality improved a little bit, but the quantity didn't improve that much since there is a lot more sections that are empty the same way the section was empty before shadowknight1109 filled it out. The only thing I would say is that he should add how this topic benefits the country and how it troubles the society, and stating both advantage and disadvantage of it helping the country will help it stay neutral.