User:TreyonReche/Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology/Gaoy53 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? TreyonReche
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: User:TreyonReche/Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer? No.
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Yes.
 * 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? Too simple.

Lead evaluation
The lead is overly simple, and the information that makes up the content of the article is not introduced in the lead. The lead contains many political terminologies such as the Cabinet of Japan, so the author should consider explaining to them so that the readers can better understand the subject of the article. In general, I suggest incorporating additional information that summarizes the major sections of the article and background information such as the political system of Japan into the lead.

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? Yes.

Content evaluation
The content added introduces different departments of Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology and their functions. While the information is relevant, important, and up-to-date, I would suggest including more details in sections such as the history of the ministry. In addition to greater detail, content such as the leadership, evolvement of the ministry, its achievements, and its role in the society would also be useful for the readers.

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? No.
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? No.

Tone and balance evaluation
The article maintains a neutral tone and position and seeks to present information about the subject in an objective way. Although the article consists neither about the praises or critiques that the public has in regards to the ministry, I think that the author should consider covering both kinds of perspectives on the subject. Presenting these viewpoints makes the article more information-rich while maintaining its neutrality.

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? No.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? No.
 * Are the sources current? Some of them.
 * Check a few links. Do they work? Some of them.

Sources and references evaluation
When I check on the links, some of them do not them, and they are not linked to specific passages in the article. While few of the sources are outdated, they are written by the ministry itself or come from popular sources such as the news, which potentially carry the biases of their authors and thus decrease its reliability. I suggest discovering sources whose authors belong to a third party and cover the ministry objectively.

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? No.
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Yes.

Organization evaluation
The structure of the article is clear through the use of headings and subtitles. It is organized in a way that highlights important information, making it easier to read for the audience. Also, there is an information box that summarizes the general information about the ministry, which contributes to organizational clarity.

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


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? N/A
 * Are images well-captioned? N/A
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? N/A
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? N/A

Images and media evaluation
The image that was already in the article gives a clear and effective representative of the subject.

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? Yes.
 * What are the strengths of the content added? Neutrality and organizational clarity.
 * How can the content added be improved? Additional content.

Overall evaluation
Overall, this article is well-written but requires additional information to improve its quality. The lead should provide the readers with more background information and give an overview of the main sections of the article. The article also needs to have additional content to better articulate the subject. In order to attain more content, the author should seek sources that are written to present information about the subject in an objective manner. In terms of content neutrality and organization of the article, the author has adhered to the guidelines of Wikipedia.