User:Ucalpoli/Sterilization of Native American women/Gmw49 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? (provide username) Ucalpoli
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: Sterilization of Native American women

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer? Not sure
 * 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? Yes
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? No
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? Concise

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
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics? Yes, I learnt a lot of interesting facts

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral? Yes
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? Not that I could tell
 * 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? Not at all, just facts are stated

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Yes I believe so
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? Yes
 * Are the sources current? To my knowledge all are
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible? 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? Yes very organized
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors? Not that I noticed
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Yes

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


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

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? The article provides all knowledge you need without giving a biased opinion
 * What are the strengths of the content added? Very accurate, powerful facts were stated
 * How can the content added be improved? Maybe more statistical pictures