User:Sknisson/Teotihuacan/Sstolte 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?
 * Sknisson
 * Link to draft you're reviewing:
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Teotihuacan&type=revision&diff=927503088&oldid=926898108#Writing_and_Literature

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer?
 * The sections is new therefore the lead was created
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Yes the article/ section starts out by describing a find that is relevant to the information that follows.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * No it does not it is only about the writing and literature
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * The lead is concise

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic?
 * Yes the content expands on the understanding of the people who lived at/around teotihuacan.
 * Is the content added up-to-date?
 * The content is up to date as it is pulled from a fined that that was not previously mentioned on the page.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * From what I can see there can always be more added but it is not needed.

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral?
 * Yes there does not seem to be any bias.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * No
 * Are there viewpoints that are over represented, or underrepresented?
 * I do not think so, the passage represents the information in a good way.
 * 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 the sources are tied in with the section and are reliable.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Yes it appears that they do.
 * Are the sources current?
 * timeline for "current" is not given but I would say that they are.
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * Yes

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Yes, I found the passage to be understandable.
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * No not that I found.
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * Only one section for the area but it is organized i a way that it can be expanded.

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete?
 * Yes the content added to the understanding of the people of the area. There can always be more information added, but the article is "complete" in terms that ideas are started and concluded.
 * What are the strengths of the content added?
 * The content added helps with the understanding of how people of this area communicated and wrote.