User:ZimuW/Wu Jianren/Hedwig Li 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? ZimuW
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: User:ZimuW/Wu Jianren

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
I don't think this person provides a Lead in this draft, those paragraphs might belong to the content part. There is no brief description about Wu. Publishing novel is an achievement of Wu Jiaren, but it's too unilateral to be a Lead.

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic? Yes.
 * Is the content added up-to-date? Yes.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? No.
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics? No. Not including in this topic.

Content evaluation
The added content make a complement to the original texts, it provides the specific detail on Wu Jianren's literature works, and the newest content. You could work on the biography or life of Wu, this part is missing in his Wikipedia article.

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral? Yes.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? No.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? No.
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? No.

Tone and balance evaluation
The balance in the draft is really well. The author gives descriptions in a neutral way. However, I would suggest that you could give more details about the influences on Wu's works.

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Yes.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? Yes.
 * Are the sources current? Yes.
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible? The sources were written by historians.
 * Check a few links. Do they work? Yes. Both links work.

Sources and references evaluation
The resources here are academically, which I can find it on academic website, and those links do work.

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? No. The organization needs to work on it. There wasn't any sub-heading for introducing contents, and hard to read.
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors? There are quite a few grammatical errors in the paragraph, such as "He is a representative of modern Chinese novel for two reasons, time and the his technique".
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? I guess this added content is the part this person wants to add to the original Wiki page, but it needs more organization.

Organization evaluation
Overall the organization here is not good. I suggest before to continue the draft, check the grammatical errors in the sandbox. However, you need to build sections, and give headings when you are telling different parts of Wu Jianren.

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 mentioned in the draft. But you could provide his image on this page.

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? Yes.
 * What are the strengths of the content added? It supplements the details that are missing in the original text.
 * How can the content added be improved? Organized the draft first, and add a Lead to the draft.

Overall evaluation
Overall, the new content added provide a more specific detail of Wu's literature work, and it introduce the influence of Wu's work. But I suggest to work on the organization of the draft, give a brief introduction for the Leap part, and provide more details about Wu in different areas.