User talk:Gbayronn/Legacy of the Spirits/Samsteen11 Peer Review

This is where you will complete your peer review exercise. Please use the following template to fill out your review.

General info[edit] Whose work are you reviewing? gbayronn Link to draft you're reviewing: page has not been created Lead[edit] Guiding questions:

Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer? not found

Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? not found

Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? not found

Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? not found

Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? not found

Lead evaluation[edit] Content[edit] Guiding questions:

Is the content added relevant to the topic? not found

Is the content added up-to-date? not found

Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? not found

Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics? not found

'''Content evaluation[edit] Tone and Balance[edit]''' Guiding questions:

Is the content added neutral? not found

Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? not found

Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? not found

Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? not found

'''Tone and balance evaluation[edit] Sources and References[edit]''' Guiding questions:''

Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? not found

Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? not found

Are the sources current? not found

Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible? not found

Check a few links. Do they work? not found

'''Sources and references evaluation[edit] Organization[edit]''' Guiding questions:

Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? not found

Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors? not found

Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? not found ''' Organization evaluation[edit] Images and Media[edit]''' Guiding questions: If your peer added images or media

Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? not found Are images well-captioned? not found

Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? not found

Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? not found

'''Images and media evaluation[edit] For New Articles Only[edit]''' 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? not found

How exhaustive is the list of sources? Does it accurately represent all available literature on the subject? not found

Does the article follow the patterns of other similar articles - i.e. contain any necessary inoboxes, section headings, and any other features contained within similar articles? not found

Does the article link to other articles so it is more discoverable? not found New Article Evaluation[edit] Overall impressions[edit] Guiding questions:

Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete? no, I was not able to peer review because nothing was updated

What are the strengths of the content added? no content was added

How can the content added be improved? adding content would be great