User talk:Fstallone22/sandbox

General info Whose work are you reviewing? (Fstallone22) Link to draft you're reviewing: User:Fstallone22/sandbox Lead

Guiding questions:

Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer? Yes, the editor suggested to add a line on how we use textile recycling but I still think it can include something additional. Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Yes, the lead properly includes an introductory sentence that briefly, concisely and clearly describes the article topic. Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? No, the lead mentions about what recycling is and where it can be found but it doesn't summarize the collection. Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? No, it does not. Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? The lead is concise and not overly detailed, it gets straight to the point. Lead evaluation Content

Guiding questions:

Is the content added relevant to the topic? Yes the content that this user added was relevant to the topic, she even references on what something known as SMART Is. Is the content added up-to-date? The added content is up-to-date on a recent article from 05/09/2019. Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? From what I see, nothing seems to be missing. Content evaluation Tone and Balance

Guiding questions:

Is the content added neutral? The content added is neutral but it can be broaden. Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? No, but it isn't in a worldwide perspective. Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? There are viewpoints that are underrepresented, it only seems to relate to developed countries such as the USA. Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? No, it is more to inform the reader. Tone and balance evaluation Sources and References

Guiding questions:

Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Yes, all new content is backed up Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? One of the sources, that the editor added does reflect the available literature. Are the sources current? Yes they are. Check a few links. Do they work? Yes, the links do work and open. Sources and references evaluation Organization

Guiding questions:

Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? Yes, the content added is easy to read and well-written. Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors? Not from what I see, no. Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? The content added basically only relates to the lead and a association of textile recycling. Organization evaluation Images and Media

Guiding questions: If your peer added images or media (My peer did not add any images.)

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 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? New Article Evaluation Overall impressions

Guiding questions:

Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete? The up-to-date added content of the article meets some of the issues needed to make the article strong. But work still can be done to improve it. What are the strengths of the content added? The added content gives the reader more information towards the lead and a active association for textile recycling. How can the content added be improved? The content added can be improved by including a bit more on the process of textile recycling.