User:Aammyllee/Pamela Goldsmith-Jones/Marchnonreal Peer Review

Peer review

edit

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

General info

edit

Lead

edit

Guiding questions:

  • Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer?
    • Yes. Various links from 2019 sources.
  • Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
    • Yes. There's a clear introduction statement.
  • 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?
    • Yes. A lot of recent engagements.
  • Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
    • The detail is consistent.

Lead evaluation

edit

5/5

Content

edit

Guiding questions:

  • Is the content added relevant to the topic?
    • Yes. All content relates to Pamela Goldsmith-Jones
  • Is the content added up-to-date?
    • All of the references for everything discussed was from the last couple of years.
  • Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
    • All of the content belongs, although there could be more detail to what she's involved in today

Content evaluation

edit

5/5

Tone and Balance

edit

Guiding questions:

  • Is the content added neutral?
    • Mostly, 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

edit

5/5

Sources and References

edit

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

edit

5/5

Organization

edit

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

edit

5/5

Images and Media

edit

Guiding questions: If your peer added images or media

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

Images and media evaluation

edit

0/0

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?
  • 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

edit

0/0

Overall impressions

edit

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?
    • More rigid accounts of her political involvement.
  • How can the content added be improved?
    • More inclusive information and more coverage on her new lifestyle independent of her political background.

Overall evaluation

edit

25/25