User:Sixtompacheco/2000s in fashion/Tatiwaxman Peer Review

General info
Jgiglio7
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cohasset%2C_Massachusetts&diff=1211852048&oldid=1210431975
 * 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.)

Consider the following structure, drawing from your notes:


 * 1) First, what does the article do well? Is there anything from your review that impressed you? Any turn of phrase that described the subject in a clear way?
 * 2) What changes would you suggest the author apply to the article? Why would those changes be an improvement?
 * 3) What's the most important thing the author could do to improve the article?
 * 4) Did you notice anything about the article you reviewed that could be applicable to your own article? Let them know!

{| class="wikitable"
 * Peer review

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer?
 * Yes, my peer has added corrections and dates to the lead.
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * yes, there is a sentence introducing the topic of the article, which is about Cohasset, Massachusetts.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * No, this could be very helpful for the article and very effective!
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * No, there is good information in the lead
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * The lead should have a bit more overview and less detailed information/data about Massachusetts.

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic?
 * yes! information is corrected and important information about specific was added
 * Is the content added up-to-date?
 * Yes, dates are fixed and updated.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * No
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?
 * Not as much. Mostly just information about a town, but is effective!

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral?
 * Yes, extremely neutral and not convincing the reader to visit the town
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * No, all is neutral. Good job keeping it neutral and informative:)

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Add some sources that back up the new dates added and other information!
 * Does the content accurately reflect what the cited sources say? (You'll need to refer to the sources to check this.)
 * Need some new sources before answering ;)
 * Are there better sources available, such as peer-reviewed articles in place of news coverage or random websites? (You may need to do some digging to answer this.)
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * add some new sources to back up new dates added, but the sources there are now are good!

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?

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


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * yes, the pictures now definitely set the tone. a few more could be added
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * yes there are good explanations under each picture but could add more pictures
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * yes!
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * spread out more throughout the article!

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete?
 * yes! definitely effective in the beggining of the article because the dates and other information was corrected
 * How can the content added be improved?
 * some more sources could be added to back up the dates changed!

Examples of good feedback
A good article evaluation can take a number of forms. The most essential things are to clearly identify the biggest shortcomings, and provide specific guidance on how the article can be improved.


 * Peer review of "Homemaking"
 * Peer review of this article about a famous painting

Additional Resources
Check out the Editing Wikipedia PDF for general editing tips and suggestions.
 * }
 * }
 * }


 * This page was last edited on 4 January 2023, at 22:50.