User:User212197/Zelle (payment service)/Apa5230 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? Apa5230
 * Link to draft you're reviewing:

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer? New content included
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Introduction sentence included
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? Sections descriptions included
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? Outside information included
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? Concisely made

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic? Relevant information
 * Is the content added up-to-date? Mostly up to date so maybe include more of that
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? A lot of the content fits
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral?
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? Overall bias is not presented
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? Presented at a neutral amount
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? Typically just informs the reader

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Reliable information added
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? Sources content is thorough
 * Are the sources current? Current sources used
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible? Sources are very diverse
 * Check a few links. Do they work? All links work

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? Well-written article so far
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors? Not many errors grammatically
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Very well organized and was one of the strengths overall

Images and Media- Not done yet
Guiding questions: If your peer added images or media


 * 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.


 * Does the article meet Wikipedia's Notability requirements - i.e. Is the article supported by 2-3 reliable secondary sources independent of the subject? Reliable
 * How exhaustive is the list of sources? Does it accurately represent all available literature on the subject? More sources could be implemented but it is well exhausted
 * 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? Followed patterns included
 * Does the article link to other articles so it is more discoverable? Yes, there are external links

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete? Article feels more complete now
 * What are the strengths of the content added? Well articulated and organization of content is strong
 * How can the content added be improved? So far, the added content is concise

Overall evaluation
Overall, great article and has a lot of potential with the additions being made. The set-up and external sources are well put together and contains a lot of outside information for future additions.