User talk:Erikbcervantes/Coffee production in Uganda/Liliananrodriguez Peer Review

Liliana Rodriguez's Peer Review
Peer review

General info

Whose work are you reviewing? (provide username) User:Erikbcervantes

Link to draft you're reviewing: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Erikbcervantes/Coffee_production_in_Uganda

Lead

Guiding questions:

Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer? No

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? Yes

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

The lead does not seem to need any edits.

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

Content evaluation

The addition of new content by decades is important for the overall flow of the 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 new information added is unbiased and factual, with sources to back up sentences.

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

Check a few links. Do they work? Yes

Sources and references evaluation

The sources are relevant and up-to-date.

Guiding questions:

Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? Yes

Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors? No

Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Yes

Organization evaluation

The addition of subheadings is a great choice. They provide information that is easy to navigate.

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? New subheadings were added about production history.

How can the content added be improved? What is coffee production like now (2010s)?

Overall evaluation

Overall, the information added is pertinent to the article. The addition of more detailed history is important. I am curious about the subheading "2000s-today." It includes great information about the early 2000s, but I would like to read a sentence or two about production in the early 2010s. Liliananrodriguez (talk) 01:11, 7 April 2020 (UTC)