User talk:Aad29/Unicorn (finance)

Devrat Patel's Peer Review
General info Whose work are you reviewing? Aad29 Link to draft you're reviewing:[|Unicorn]

Lead Guiding questions:

Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer? The lead seems up to date. 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. Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? No. Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? Concise Lead evaluation - Overall the lead is very concise and can be added more details into it. However, the information in the lead is up to date.

Content Guiding questions:

Is the content added relevant to the topic? Yes. Is the content added up-to-date? There are a few places where the content needs to be updated to reflect the current information. 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. Content evaluation - Briefly speaking content is very detailed and relevant to the topic. There are some places where content can be updated to reflect the new information. But again they are not very old so it is fine.

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 - Overall the tone and balance of the content are neutral. There is no way the content raises the bias in the mind of the reader. It represents the information as it is.

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? Are the sources current? Yes. 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? Yes. Sources and references evaluation - I checked a few sources and they seem to be working nice. There can be a place where sources can be added.

Organization Guiding questions:

Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? Very easy to read and concise and clear Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors? Rarely. Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Yes, it is well organized. Organization evaluation - The Organization of this article is really good. It talks about the topic and gives an overview in the lead. Then it tells the history and thereafter it is broken down into the section and subsection.

Images and Media N/A

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 the article is well written. However, it has some great qualities and with a few tweaks and edits with the references, it can be really good. Dqp5391 (talk) 03:27, 19 October 2020 (UTC)