User:Starfly5/Capital murder/An anonymous entity Peer Review

General info
(provide username) Starfly5
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing:-there is not a draft, so I am just going to review the current article.
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists):Capital murder

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.)

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer?
 * There have been no edits by the user...
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * While it does describe the article topic, it is not concise. Could stand to be reworded to something like "Capital murder is a classification of murder as a capital offense which warrants capital punishment, this distinction means that the accused can be punished by the death penalty"
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * Yes.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * The lead does include information not mentioned in the article: "'capital murder' is not a phrase used in the legal system but may still be used by others such as the media," especially for this course there should be a section on media influence. Or at least amend the lead to only include topics covered in the rest of the article.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * I would not say it is concise, I had to reread it a few times. I think some restructuring of the wording would be ideal so that the lead is not so roundabout. It would also be helpful to explain certain terms such as a statutory offense because I do not think that distinction is common knowledge.

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic?
 * Yes.
 * Is the content added up-to-date?
 * I guess, it is mostly just lists of different amendments and acts.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * The lead mentions media representation of capital punishment but there is no section for it.
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?
 * This article most definitely deals with an equity gap! At least in the US, capital punishment is very racially disproportionate and it is very well documented. There is a lot of available literature on the system of capital punishment, and specifically the role of life sentences and the death penalty. Though, this article does not address any of that, it is mostly just lists of legalese...

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral?
 * Very.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * There are not any viewpoints.
 * 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?
 * Not at all, there seems to be no position at all.
 * Not at all, there seems to be no position at all.

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * No new content.
 * Does the content accurately reflect what the cited sources say? (You'll need to refer to the sources to check this.)
 * Yes.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * No, the only sources are penal codes or cases involving capital punishment. Maybe I am biased because I always want there to be some social sciences, which I think is definitely relevant to this course, especially regarding crime because there are so many social ramifications for the definition of crimes and the effect of punishment. There are no sources that discuss the social implications, which is also where a section for media (mis)representation of capital punishment/offenses would be necessary.
 * Are the sources current?
 * The most recent ones are in the 2020s from an Irish newspaper.
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * No, the only sources that are not court rulings or pulled from the penal code record are from the the Irish Times.
 * 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.)
 * there are 4 statements which Wiki has flagged "citation needed" in the United States section, which is strange because a lot of the lead is focused on the US. There are also many sections without any inline citations, the Great Britain section only references other wiki articles, the Northern Ireland section has only has one reference,
 * 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?
 * There is no content added by the user in the revision history.
 * 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?
 * Yes, there is a section for every country mentioned in the lead

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 for 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?
 * there is no added content...
 * What are the strengths of the content added?
 * How can the content added be improved?