User:Yanjun-Liu3/May Fourth Movement/Mjwng 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? Yanjun-Liu3
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: User:Yanjun-Liu3/May Fourth Movement

Lead
Guiding questions:


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

Lead evaluation
The lead contains new information about the leaders, as well as quotes that are not put into paragraph form yet.

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?
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?

Content evaluation
Content seems relevant to the topic, two sources seem dated and not up-to date.

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
Content is for the most part neutral, I do think that this part "A successful patriotic movement must have leaders" does not have to be included.

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?
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Sources and references evaluation
Much of the new information is not referenced unless it is quoted.

First two sources are dated.

Sources seem to all work, they all take me to the google page to purchase the source.

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
Content is well organized, just the section in the beginning that starts with "Draft:..." that leads a bunch of quotations with numbers needs to be changed.

Content has no grammatical or spelling errors.

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
Images are laid out in a appealing way, but the last image is not cited.

Some images may not need to be included as they are not of the May Fourth Movement related.

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
Overall, a lot of information has been added, but some of the information is cited as if written as an essay. I think the important part is to capture the secondary source's point to support your understanding of the information you are adding and to cite it that way. Other than that, the information added is useful to add.