User:ShaynaSaltzburg/Wunderbar Syracuse/Arfleming Peer Review

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! I think the Lead could be beefed up a little bit to more specifically introduce the major sections.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * Yes
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * I think it's very concise, and that you could even include more details!

Content

Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic?
 * Yes
 * Is the content added up-to-date?
 * Yes, pretty up-to-date — the most recent date I saw was November 2023.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * Not that I can tell
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?
 * Yes — LGBTQIA+ individuals. I think there could be another section on how queer bars (not just in Syracuse) have served as a safe haven for the LGBTQIA+ community.

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

Sources and References:

Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Some but not all. The first sentence of the lead, and the mission section, these especially need to be attributed to a source. Every fact or claim you're making should have a citation!
 * Does the content accurately reflect what the cited sources say?
 * From what I can tell, yes.
 * Are the sources thorough?
 * I think you could have more sources, about queer bars in general.
 * Are the sources current?
 * Yes
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * It's hard to tell exactly but I think it would be important to include at least one source written by an LGBTQIA+ individual.
 * Are there better sources available, such as peer-reviewed articles in place of news coverage or random websites?
 * Yes — you don't have any peer-reviewed articles and there could be more news articles.
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * They work!

Organization

Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written?
 * Yes
 * Does the content added have any grammar or spelling errors?
 * Yes - "programing" section hed should be "Programming" — other than that I don't think so!
 * Is the content added well-organized?
 * Yes, but maybe there could be more sections

For New Articles Only


 * Does the article meet Wikipedia's Notability requirements?
 * Yes
 * How exhaustive is the list of sources? Does it accurately represent all available literature on the subject?
 * The list is not very exhaustive.
 * Does the article follow the patterns of other similar articles?
 * Yes
 * Does the article link to other articles so it is more discoverable?
 * No, I think we all need to do this better.

Overall impressions

Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article?
 * Definitely?
 * What are some strengths of the content added?
 * It is very comprehensive and informative.
 * How can the content added be improved?
 * I think you can find more sources and subsequently beef up all of your sections and the lead.

General info
(provide username)
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing:
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists):

Evaluate the drafted changes
(Compose a detailed peer review here, considering each of the key aspects listed above if it is relevant. Consider the guiding questions, and check out the examples of what feedback looks like.)