User:Xuming Li/Stuart Hall School/Jaditol Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Xuming Li


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Xuming%20Li/Stuart_Hall_School?veaction=edit&preload=Template%3ADashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Stuart Hall School - Wikipedia

Evaluate the drafted changes
Hi Xuming, here's my peer review for you:

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer?
 * The lead is updated with where most of the students went for colleges and university.
 * By providing the year "since 1844", the readers will be able to tell the reputation of the high school, as well as inviting them to know more in the following sections.


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Yes, the article has it before doing any edition.
 * Can be improved by more information, such as ranking (you can check the Bear Creek High School wiki page as a reference: The Bear Creek School - Wikipedia).
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * Need to work on the brief description; you can just briefly mention the following section that will introduce later on.
 * Might also need to work on the "content" section when polishing the article.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * No, but need to work on it to make it more informational and engaging.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * Concise, but might be better if the lead provides more external information, such as adding hyperlinks to "Virginia" or other words that might seem unfamiliar with readers.

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic?
 * Absolutely, the part added (Tradition) is relevant to the topic, especially it is hard to gather this information without actually being a student of Stuart Hall School.
 * The sub-topics of this part also provide the information about the topic, sufficient with the explanations.
 * Is the content added up-to-date?
 * Yes, some of the references you use are from the actual website which is probably updated at least once a year by the school administers.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * There might be some "student" traditions missing (I guess). By all means, those traditions that only float around the student body, but might not be official.
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?
 * The added topic itself is inclusive. You utilize works that includes all students (implying all races and genders), and showing the unity and inclusivity of the community.
 * I am not sure about the underrepresented populations/topics, since I do not have much knowledge about the population of the area. Maybe worth to add some equity topics while talking about the traditions.

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral?
 * Yes, the language is descriptive, doing a great job in explaining who, what and why.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * No, doing a great job in using natural tone.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * I don't think so. But might be a great idea to balance the word length of each individual tradition.

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Sources are from the official high school websites.
 * More sources will be appreciated.
 * Does the content accurately reflect what the cited sources say? (You'll need to refer to the sources to check this.)
 * One thing that you need to change is that, you cited multiple times of one single reference called "Tradition", what you need to do is to click "re-use" citation when citing instead of creating 6 same reference links.
 * Are the sources current?
 * Yes, like I said earlier, guaranteed to be updated.
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * Yes, works. But like I said earlier, more sources will be appreciated.

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Yes, the description underneath each subtopic is helpful and informational.
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * Nope, doing great.
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * Yes, with the ballets, it provides a clear outline to the audience with the bolded topic words.

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


 * No image added (not applicable).

For New Articles Only
If the draft you're reviewing is for 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?
 * It is reliable since the information are pulled out from the official website.
 * I would encourage you to do a deeper research and find more interested information.
 * Does the article follow the patterns of other similar articles - i.e. contain any necessary info-boxes, section headings, and any other features contained within similar articles?
 * Since the Wiki page has not much information before you edit, you are free to set your writing style.
 * The current style you have is concise and easy to read, I would say that you can keep it.
 * Does the article link to other articles so it is more discoverable?
 * Need to work on this part a bit. You can add more hyperlinks to nouns that seem unfamiliar to the audience.

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete?
 * Definitely, Tradition is a huge part of knowing the community from a basic level. This is a good pick and looking forward to more of your inputs.
 * What are the strengths of the content added?
 * It makes the page more information and readers tent to stay longer time on the page.
 * How can the content added be improved?
 * DEEPER RESEARCH PLEASE.
 * You are doing great in using unbiased language and the organization is well. Keep going.