User:Taylorjackson0911/Corporate social media/Beck1212 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? Taylorjackson0911
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: User:Taylorjackson0911/sandbox

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer? Not on the official page.
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? It's a bit wordy.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? No.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? Kind of, I think the facts about what percentages of corporations have social media accounts should be moved to a different section.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? It's a bit too detailed.

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic? Yes, I especially like the chart that shows different types of social media.
 * Is the content added up-to-date? Yes.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? It's only missing because it isn't added to the main article yet, otherwise it's good.

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral? Yes.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? No.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? Not that I can tell.
 * 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, but the citations in the sandbox have not been updated to the Wikipedia citation format.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? Yes.
 * Are the sources current? Yes.
 * 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? Some of both the original article and your new info is written kind of awkwardly. I suggest fixing this, because it can really impact how easy it is to read the finished article. (If you need help making the article flow you can use the writing center!)
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors? There are some (see above).
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Yes, it is very well organized, but I would have liked to see your plan for adding new sections/content to the main article (ex: a list of what order you would put the sections in).

Images and Media
Guiding questions: If your peer added images or media (They did not.)


 * 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 a new article, consider the following in addition to the above. (It's not a new article.)'''


 * 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, I think you did a really good job finding new information on the topic, and you organized it well.
 * What are the strengths of the content added? Organization and quality of information.
 * How can the content added be improved? Fix awkward phrasing/grammar issues, and make an outline of how the final article will be organized including your contributions.