User:Sxndrx2828/Psychology/Ph1275 Peer Review

General info
Sxndrx2828
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing:User:Sxndrx2828/Psychology
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists):

Evaluate the drafted changes
Lead:


 * The lead has been updated to reflect the new content.
 * The lead does include an introductory sentence but it could use a more detailed sentence to describe the topic.
 * The lead does include a description but it could use more detail to mention the main points of each section.
 * The lead does not include information that is not present in the article.
 * I think the lead is a bit concise and could use more detail, but it is good.

Content:


 * The content added is relevant to the topic.
 * The added content is up to date.
 * I don't think there is any missing content or content that doesn't belong.
 * The article does not deal with Wikipedia's equity gaps.

Tone and balance:


 * The content added is neutral.
 * No claims appeared to be heavily biased.
 * No views were over or under presented.
 * The content added does not seem to be persuasive.

Sources and references:


 * All new content were backed up by reliable secondary source.
 * The content accurately reflect what is sourced.
 * They reflect the available literature on topic.
 * The sources seem to be current.
 * Most of the sources seemed to be written by a diverse spectrum of authors.
 * From what I was able to find, these sources were good and were similar to what I found.
 * The links that I tried worked.

Organization:


 * The content added was well written, it was clear and easy to understand.
 * I wasn't able to find any grammatical or spelling errors.
 * The content is organized but I think it could be a bit more organizing by using sub sections.

Images and media:


 * The article does include images that enhance understanding of the topic, however I think there could be more images added since there is only one image.
 * The image is well captioned.
 * The image does adhere the Wikipedia's copyright regulations.
 * The image is laid out in a visually appealing way.

Overall Impressions:


 * I think the content added have improved the overall quality of the article however there is room for more content to be added.
 * The strength of the content was the organization.
 * How the content added can be improved is by adding more images and a bit more content throughout the article.