User:Siffat05/Visual Ethnography/Acforlando 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)
 * Link to draft you're reviewing:

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer?
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?

Lead evaluation
The lead provides little context into visual ethnography as a specific methodology within qualitative research. I suggest linking to several existing Wikipedia pages within the lead itself, including qualitative research. I would not recommend including quotes within the lead, but rewriting the text to rephrase in your own words and including the citation at the end of the sentence. Finally, the lead does not introduce the rest of the article, so I recommend doing that in order to capitalize on the top space of the page.

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic?
 * Is the content added up-to-date?
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?

Content evaluation
Content looks OK. Seems like you've covered a lot about the material. Again, I question the need for so many quotations; I think the article will seem stronger if you rephrase a lot of them into your own writing and add the citations at the end.

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?

Tone and balance evaluation
Tone seems good to me; there is no apparent bias within the article.

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Are the sources current?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Sources and references evaluation
You need to add a proper reference list per Wikipedia. Plan to go back and edit that into correct formatting. I can't check links; there aren't any. I would recommend linking to several Wikipedia articles throughout the duration of this page.

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Does the content added have 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?

Organization evaluation
There is a big section in the middle that uses first person writing. I imagine some of this came from your QR paper, but you should plan to edit these sections so they read in third person or without a narrative.

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


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?

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?

New Article Evaluation
The biggest piece here is the headings, sections, and reference list all need to be formatted to meet Wikipedia standards. I would recommend linking to other articles as well in order to meet Notability requirements. Your reference list seems strong, so use that to your advantage and add the citations within the article per Wiki guidelines.

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete?
 * What are the strengths of the content added?
 * How can the content added be improved?

Overall evaluation
Overall this is an amazing start to a new page. You are brave and I love it! Keep editing away; I am sure the final product will be fabulous.