User:Wdtseng/Late talker/Caredgate1 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? wdtsend
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: Late talker

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, there are no major sections.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? There is no difference between the lead and the rest of the article.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?

Lead evaluation
There is no distinct Lead section for this article. The first sentence does a good job of introducing the definition of the topic, however, that's the extent of what I would consider a lead.

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic?
 * Is the content added up-to-date?
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?

Content evaluation
There is a lot missing still. The points that are brought up are not the most relevant, in my opinion. If I were going to this article for help, I would be looking for signs/warnings, what professionals to seek, diagnosing process, then the common misdiagnoses mentioned in the second paragraph, followed by the Einstein Syndrome section. There was also no conclusion, just a few facts jotted down.

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral?
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?

Tone and balance evaluation
While a neutral tone was maintained, there was more about it's misdiagnosis as Autism and how it's related to Autism, more than what being a Late Talker actually is.

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Are the sources current?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Sources and references evaluation
Most of the sources seem current and valid, though there were some blog posts or other questionable sources. I believe there are more sources available as there wasn't much information touched on.

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?

Organization evaluation
Grammatically the article seems well written, sentence structure is good. However, the topics kind of bounce around, there are no set sections for different topics, and much of the information is fringe information.

Images and Media
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?

Images and media evaluation
No images or media.

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?
 * What are the strengths of the content added?
 * How can the content added be improved?

Overall evaluation
I think there is a lot of information missing. If I was going to look up what a Late Talker was, this article would be of no help other than maybe giving a list of a few articles that might be able to help point me in the right direction. The main focus of the article should be on what being a Late Talker is, how it is determined, what to look for, and how to get appropriate help.