User:Siyi Shen/Cai Yuanpei/Wquon 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)
 * Siyi Shen
 * Link to draft you're reviewing:
 * User:Siyi Shen/Cai Yuanpei

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer?
 * N/A, no lead.
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * N/A
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * N/A
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * N/A
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * N/A

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic?
 * Yes
 * Is the content added up-to-date?
 * Yes, going from the sources which some are quite new.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * No, the content is about what Cai Yuanpei has done and his contributions, thoughts, and stances on particular matters.
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral?
 * Yes.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * No, doesn't seem like it.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * Nope, doesn't seem like it.
 * 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?
 * Yes
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Yes, looks like it.
 * Are the sources current?
 * Going by the date, they are quite current, with 2007, 2013, and 2020.
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * Sources are each written by only one author.
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * Links work!

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Yes, nice separation of information and good usage of lines.
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * Can't find any issues.
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * Yes, fairly well organized.

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?

NA - no images added.

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 impressions
Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete?
 * Yes, there is some information that is not on the original page.
 * What are the strengths of the content added?
 * Get a better understanding of what Cai Yuanpei did and a closer look at what he was involved in, instead of one straight timeline/section of his life.
 * How can the content added be improved?
 * Just a few things that I wasn't sure where to comment earlier.
 * "a Chinese citizen (zhongguo yimin)" : This may have been your intention, but putting just the romanization of the Chinese words seems a bit weird here. I think it'd look a lot nicer with the Chinese characters themselves!
 * "He emphasized the importance of aesthetics for social stability and development. He emphasized the social...." : Technically not wrong, but starting two sentences in a row with "he emphasized" sounds a bit awkward. Perhaps look for a different word or even combine the sentences!
 * "This article shows Cai Yuanpei's early political thoughts and concerns about Chinese society as a patriot. This article is not only a wake-up" : Similar to the above sentence, but in this case I also have a tough time knowing what "this article" is. Do you mean the short story?
 * I noticed your sources are one after the other, sometimes the next sentence, and they come from the same source. I think they can be simply grouped up as 1 source. so instead of 6 sources with repeats, it'll be 3 sources. I've seen in other articles too, if you need to source that specific sentence, that they use [1] multiple times, so you don't have to create the second link if they come from the same source.

Overall evaluation
Great work so far! Looks clean and hopefully this will help you for your next version!