User:Tpourci1/Action film/Favaa98 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?  Tpourci1, Kmklein1, Troygreen65
 * Link to draft you're reviewing:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Tpourci1/Action_film/Favaa98_Peer_Review?veaction=edit&preload=Template%3ADashboard.wikiedu.org_peer_review

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer? No, the lead has not been updated.
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Yes, the first sentence goes on to explain what an action film consist of such as how the lead in the movie goes through a series of violent situations against enemies.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? No the lead does not include a brief description of the article's major sections. The lead mainly speaks about cgi which is not a major sections included in this article.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? No, although cgi is not a major section it is mentioned in the 1990s history in detail.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? The lead was not overly detailed but it could have added more information about the major sections that are talked about in the article.

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic? Yes the content is relevant to the topic. Knowing about the history and how action films have evolved over the years are important facts. Also, speaking of the sub genres explains the versatility of action films and speaking of the notable individuals can inform the reader on how they have impacted action films.
 * Is the content added up-to-date? For the most part the article looks up-to-date but more current content could be added as well.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? The Hong Kong action cinema section does not relate to the information that is already presented. Did the Hong Kong action cinema help shape action films into what they currently are?
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics? This article does its part include female actresses, directors, and minorities that are involved in the film industry which is a good thing.

==== Content evaluation- The content of the article is good. The hong kong section needs to re-evaluated on if it should be included in the article or not. If that section is included, it should be rewritten into relating more to the topic. For example, the section could be about action films in other cultures or how hong kong inspired action films. ====

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral? The content of the article is neutral for the most part, i don't see any mentions of one genre or certain time in history being better than the other one. It also does not say that male or female actors/directors are better than one another, Everything is talked about in a consistent neutral tone.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? No, they are no claims that appear heavily biased towards a particular position.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? All subgenres are represented for but some of them mentions more information than others do.For example, disaster film and action horror films only have 1-3 sentences.
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? No, the content added does not try to attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position over the other.

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Most of the content is backed by a reliable source except for the hong kong and notable figure sections. These sections do not have any sources at all.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? Yes the sources that are used all have to do with the action film genre which is what the article is about.
 * Are the sources current? The sources range from the years 1993 to 2019. Some are current and some are very outdated.
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible? Yes there is a diverse spectrum of authors. They include minorities and some women authors.
 * Check a few links. Do they work? Most of the links in the reference section work.

==== Sources and references evaluation- Overall the use of sources are okay. It could use some recent sources to make the article go along with more current films. Also there needs to be sources included in the Notable figures section and the hong kong section if it is improved to use in the article. ====

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? Yes, the content is easy to read but needs improvements.
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors? The article should be edited to make sure the flow of the sentences are clear and concise. Some sentences need to be taken out.
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? The content is extremely organized. The structure of it is great.

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


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? There is an image of the actor Sylvester Stallone in the notable individual sections. It enhances it in a way to show how he is one of the most notable figures in the action film genre.
 * Are images well-captioned? Yes, the image is well captioned.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? Yes the image adheres to Wikipedia's copyright regulations because it is from the wikimedia platform which has photos up for use that are not subjected to copyright restrictions.
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? Yes, the image is 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.


 * 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 more content that needs to be added or removed from this article.
 * What are the strengths of the content added? The strengths of this article is the organization and structure.
 * How can the content added be improved? The content could be improved by adding more sources and info to some of the major sections, editing the lead section to include a brief summary of the major sections. Review the hong kong section and see if it is needed in the article.