User:TimTom05/Corruption in Botswana/Whook17 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? TimTom05
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: User:TimTom05/Corruption in Botswana

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer? The lead seems to be in good shape. Formatting could possibly be a little less repetitive.
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Not really, it sort of just jumps in with statistics. A little bit of introduction probably wouldn't hurt.
 * 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? No
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? It is mostly concise.

Lead evaluation
Overall good lead. All thats missing is an overview and a better introduction to the topic.

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic? Yes
 * Is the content added up-to-date? Yes
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? No

Content evaluation
Content is solid.

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral? Yes
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? Not necessarily.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? No
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? No

Tone and balance evaluation
Educational tone, good work.

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? There may be room for some more information.
 * Are the sources current? Mostly
 * Check a few links. Do they work? Yes

Sources and references evaluation
Solid sourcing.

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? Yes
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors? Not that were evident to me.
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Yes. I would change "extent" to "perception of corruption" (other articles are titled as such) but other than that it mostly all works.

Organization evaluation
Solid organization. Revise some of the headings.

Images and Media
Guiding questions: If your peer added images or media


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? No
 * Are images well-captioned? Only one image.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? Yes
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? Yes

Images and media evaluation
This article might benefit from an image or two.

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? Yes
 * How exhaustive is the list of sources? Does it accurately represent all available literature on the subject? There may be room for more information.
 * 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? Other articles have a little more substance, I think this once could have a bit more as well.
 * Does the article link to other articles so it is more discoverable? Yes

New Article Evaluation
solid stuff.

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete? Yes
 * What are the strengths of the content added? Content is precise and unbiased.
 * How can the content added be improved? More sections, and more information would be helpful. I am not sure what all is available on the topic though.

Overall evaluation
Overall solid start. You're closer than I am to finished.