User:Vale.ramir04/Pesticide poisoning/Ethanwon14 Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

User: Vale.ramir04


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:Vale.ramir04/Pesticide poisoning


 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)

Evaluate the drafted changes
Lead


 * 1) The Lead has not been updated to reflect the new content presented in the article. This is partially due to the fact that there is no noticeable lead for the readers to follow or gain information
 * 2) There is no introductory sentence in the Lead. Instead, it goes straight into the problems of pesticide poisoning and the exposure
 * 3) The Lead does not generally give a wide picture of the importance of the article. The topic is very narrow and precise. Try starting from a wider view to give the audience the bigger setting of the whole purpose of the article
 * 4) The information is prevalent in the article
 * 5) The Lead needs to be concise and straight to the point. SHow the purpose of the article and the topic you are planning to write about

Content


 * 1) The content, so far on the Wikipedia page, is related to the topic that you are planning to write about. The information stays focused with the given information in regards to pesticide poisoning
 * 2) The content is somewhat up-to-date. Try using a variety of articles from different sources of a wide range of time periods. Show the recurring problems of pesticides and the long term effects in the Central Valley
 * 3) All the content belongs to the article
 * 4) The Wikipedia page does not include any equity gaps that would be seen as bias or anything. The article avoids any relation to historically underrepresented population or topics

Tone and Balance


 * 1) The content contains a little bias with the language and tone the article is written. Remember to remain neutral and use unbiased language. Do not take any side when writing a Wikipedia page. Merely represent the facts and don’t use extreme language
 * 2) No claims necessarily take a stance for one side. Just be sure to remain neutral throughout the article
 * 3) The negative effects of the pesticides is merely just shown throughout the article. Explain why pesticides were used and how its outcome affected people’s lives
 * 4) The article does persuade readers as it mainly focuses on the negative effects of pesticide. If that is the main focus of the article, just make sure to give the broad view of pesticides

Sources and References


 * 1) There are reliable secondary sources listed in the bibliography. Helps make the article credible and reliable
 * 2) The content is accurately reflected by the cited sources. However, try to stick with the sources when writing because the whole purpose is to restate and summarize the facts from the articles
 * 3) The sources are thorough
 * 4) The sources have a variety of dates that some being recent and others being a bit older
 * 5) The sources are written by a wide variety of authors, demonstrating the different viewpoints within the article. The different views show that the articles have different ideas that make the sources more useful
 * 6) It also is better to use the peer-reviewed sources because it is more reliable and the information has been verified to be correct
 * 7) Links do work

Organization


 * 1) The content is written well and the language is easy to follow. The language is simple and allows the readers to understand the information
 * 2) The article does not contain many grammatical errors. However, continue to proofread all your writing
 * 3) The content so far is organized into one little section. Make sure to have big topics, which is followed by sub-topics

Images and Media


 * 1) No images were added
 * 2) No captions for images
 * 3) With not given imag,es no need to follow Wikipedia’s copyright requirements
 * 4) No images

For New Articles Only


 * 1) Does follow requirements
 * 2) Contains the necessary amount of list of sources that was used in the article
 * 3) Good pattern and consistency
 * 4) Yes

Overall Impressions


 * 1) The content of the article is complete and the information is well represented. With what was written so far, the language contains no errors and it is easy to follow
 * 2) The strengths of the article comes from the strong language when talking about the negative effects of pesticide poisoning. The mood evokes that this is a pressing matter that should be resolved
 * 3) The content can be improved by adding images and more general information that makes the page more appealing and informative