User talk:Ckirk9/The National Federation of the Blind v. Target

Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer? No, the lead has not been updated because it appears that it does not need to be. Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Yes, the lead includes an introductory sentence than concisely describes the articles topic. Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? No, the lead does not include a brief description of the major sections of the page. Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? No. Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? I believe it is too concise, it should include some information about whats going to be talked about.

Is the content added relevant to the topic? The content that is added is relevant to the topic. Is the content added up-to-date?As up to date as it can be. Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? Not that I can see Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics? Yes, the page includes other pages that are often underrepresented in our community.

Is the content added neutral? The content that has been added is on facts, so yes. Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? No, the page includes multiple points of view. 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? The content that is added appears to be informational, so no, the content is not being added to sway me one way.

Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? I wish there were more sources but the sources included appear to be reliable. Does the content accurately reflect what the cited sources say? (You'll need to refer to the sources to check this.) Yes. Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? Yes. Are the sources current? They are as current as can be. Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible? Yes and No. I believe the authors come from a range of authors, but I can’t answer whether they are actually marginalized. Are there better sources available, such as peer-reviewed articles in place of news coverage or random websites? (You may need to do some digging to answer this.) No, Callista found a good source. Check a few links. Do they work? Yes.

Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? The content is very easy to read, it is very well written. Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors? It does not appear to have any. Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? The content is well organized, it was made to be easily understood.

Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? No. Are images well-captioned? No. Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? Yes? Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? No.

Does the article meet Wikipedia's Notability requirements - i.e. Is the article supported by 2-3 reliable secondary sources independent of the subject? Her part does not but I can imagine it will be. How exhaustive is the list of sources? Does it accurately represent all available literature on the subject? The list accurately represents available literature on the topic 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? It follows the pattern of regular Wikipedia pages. Does the article link to other articles so it is more discoverable? Yes.

Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete? It looks complete in my opinion. What are the strengths of the content added? The strengths are the content that has been added, it is very informative. How can the content added be improved? If it was more visually appealing the content would be easier to read. That being said, I think all that needs improving is the amount of quality sources. In addition, I looked at the history of the pages, hopefully the person who keeps removing the written work by “Ckirk9” is not doing so for the wrong reasons.