User:Sidhu-jas98/Dalit Buddhist movement/Sampriti.Saxena 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?
 * I am reviewing Jaspreet's (Sidhu-jas98) additions to the "Dalit Buddhist movement" article.
 * Link to draft you're reviewing:
 * User:Sidhu-jas98/Dalit Buddhist movement
 * Original article: Dalit Buddhist movement

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer?
 * The lead has not been updated, but the plan shared indicates that it will updated to reflect the political developments of the last five years.
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * The existing lead does follow this structure quite closely.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * The current lead does not touch upon the last major section about the movement following Ambedkar's death.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * No, the existing lead is consistent with the article's content.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * The current lead is quite clear and concise.

Lead evaluation
Overall, the existing lead is effective. It clearly summarises the article and provides enough information on almost every major section. With Jaspreet's contribution, it will most likely need a sentence or two more to summarise the new major section.

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic?
 * The content added is relevant to the topic and will be helpful in understanding where the movement stands today.
 * Is the content added up-to-date?
 * The content added is up-to-date, with the oldest source being from 2008.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * I didn't notice any content missing or content that does not belong.

Content evaluation
Overall I think the content is relevant to the topic and a good addition to the article.

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral?
 * The content largely maintains a neutral tone, though I think there may room to make it sound more encyclopaedic.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * None of the claims appear to be heavily biased towards any particular position.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * There do not appear to be any overrepresented or underrepresented viewpoints.
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favour of one position or away from another?
 * The content does not attempt to persuade the reader in any way.

Tone and balance evaluation
Overall, I think this article maintains a balanced, and neutral tone throughout, although I do feel that there is room to make the language slightly more encyclopaedic in nature.

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * The secondary sources all seem to come from formal journals, and so can be considered reliable.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Each source covers a different aspect of the topic, and together they create quite a comprehensive view.
 * Are the sources current?
 * Yes. The oldest is from 2008, which is still quite recent.
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * The links in the bibliography all work. The links in the article also work, though I didn't check all of them.

Sources and references evaluation
The new and existing sources all seem to be good, reliable secondary sources of information for this article. There is a mix of academic sources and news articles here. Certain statements in the main article are missing citations (mainly the factual ones, ie. the sentence about Buddhist population percentages).

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * The content is quite clear and concise.
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * I did not notice any grammatical or spelling errors.
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * The content is well-organised.

Organization evaluation
The content is clear and easy to follow. It summarises the topic in a easy way to read and understand.

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete?
 * The content will be an important addition to the article, as it will provide a critical update on the health of the movement in light of recent political developments.
 * What are the strengths of the content added?
 * The main strength of the content that will be added are that it brings the article up to date with recent events, which are important in understanding how the movement is faring.
 * How can the content added be improved?
 * One important thing to consider for this content will be maintaining a neutral tone, as it is a topic that lends itself quite easily to bias. The diversity of sources and their academic nature will probably be helpful in avoiding a bias. While updating the article, it may also be helpful to update any outdated statistics if possible, especially in terms of the size of the movement's following today.

Overall evaluation
The addition to the article will be helpful in understanding the movement at large, and will be a valuable contribution. It seems to be shaping up quite well.