User:Mackenziebrumbaugh/Impulse purchase/Nrkjordaan 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? Not really, it doesn't seem so.
  • 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? Minimal, I don't think so honestly.
  • Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? Its short and to the point.

Lead evaluation - Needs Work

edit

Content

edit

Guiding questions:

  • Is the content added relevant to the topic? Yes
  • Is the content added up-to-date? Yes it was edited 5/07/2020
  • Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? Missing some stuff, does not seem to have that much info.

Content evaluation

edit

Tone and Balance

edit

Guiding questions:

  • Is the content added neutral? Yes
  • Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? Not that I can see.
  • Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? No, I don't think so.
  • Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? Persuade.

Tone and balance evaluation

edit

Sources and References

edit

Guiding questions:

  • Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? I think so, Yes
  • Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? Yes there are sources.
  • Are the sources current? No, most resent is 2011.
  • Check a few links. Do they work? Yes they work.

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? Yes its easy to read.
  • Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors? Not that I have seen.
  • Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Yes.

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?
  • 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

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?
  • 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

Overall impressions

edit

Guiding questions:

  • Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete? Article is not complete.
  • What are the strengths of the content added? The intro of the article.
  • How can the content added be improved? Every section needs a little improvement.

Overall evaluation- Needs work to be complete, however it is a good topic.

edit