User talk:IqraSajjad1/Torwali Language

I am a little confused with which article is my peers & what is the original. However, on the User Page, there is nothing other than one source & one sentence about the language, so if that is all my peer wrote, I cannot peer review it.

However, I wrote this peer review about the full article because I was confused: The lead includes a very interesting introduction sentence that concisely & clearly describes the topic. However, the lead does not include a brief description of the other sections. The lead is overall concise & not too overly detailed. The content is pretty prevalent to the topic, however it is heavy on the actual words of the language. The content seems pretty up to date, with references from 2019. I feel like there is a lot of content missing. More information on the culture should be present & less on the spelling & pronunciation of words in this language. This article does not deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps. All content is neutral & unbiased, however there is an overrepresentation of the actual language & an underrepresentation of the culture. All of their information is cited by reliable sources & accurately represents the sources information. The sources are current & through, however a few of the sources are from the same person; Zubair Torwali. The links work, & all of the references are the ones I researched, there are not many others to be used. The content is easy to read with no spelling or grammatical errors. It is organized, but there are really no sections organizing the different topics. There are 2 images on this page. Both images have clear captions & adhere to Wikipedia's guidelines. They both are interesting & relate to the subject. This article still has some way to come, but it is on a great path. The amount of sources is definitely a strength, but I would work on different sections.

19dakota19 (talk) 17:47, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Final Review
Hi Iqra, this is my feedback for your final project. As a reminder, the 6 points on which I'm grading you are Language, Structure, Balance, Accuracy, Relevance, and Length. Here are my assessments on each of those areas:


 * 1) Language: On the whole, the article employs proper English spelling and grammar. 5 points.
 * 2) Structure: The article follows the suggested template. 5 points.
 * 3) Balance: At present, the article appears to reflect a neutral point of view. 5 points.
 * 4) Accuracy: Most of the claims are backed by references to the scholarly literature. 5 points.
 * 5) Relevance: Nearly all of the information is relevant to the subject. 5 points.
 * 6) Length: Word count 2347/2000 (including headers but not bibliography). 5 points.

The final score is 30/30. Have a great summer! Chuck Haberl (talk) 14:55, 12 May 2021 (UTC)