User:Nancy.lynn4/Jessica Littlewood/Marshaemerson Peer Review

Peer review

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

General info

• Whose work are you reviewing? Nancy.lynn4
• Link to draft you're reviewing: User:Nancy.lynn4/Jessica Littlewood

Lead

Guiding questions:

• Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer?
  • No, not at the time of reviewing.
• 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?
  • A content box, yes. Not any explanation.
• Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
  • No.
• Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
  • Yes.

Content

Guiding questions:

• Is the content added relevant to the topic?
  • It is relevant.
• Is the content added up-to-date?
  • Yes.
• Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
  • In regards to what is added, there is no information missing that I know of.

Tone and Balance

Guiding questions:

• Is the content added neutral?
  • 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, it does not.

Sources and References

Guiding questions:

• Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
  • There is no source added or citation for the new information.
• Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
  • N/A
• Are the sources current?
  • No, there is no citation for the new information.
• Check a few links. Do they work?
  • The one link from the previous information is working.

Organization

Guiding questions:

• Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
  • It is clear, but there could be a better transition from her recognition of passion into what that has to do with the use of her personal vehicle.
• 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?
  • It appears like it would be added on the first paragraph so there would be no breaking down of sections.

Images and Media

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?

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?
  • There is no sources added so there could be more citations and sources for the information.
• 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?
  • It does follow similar articles, however, I personally would put the information added into a subsection of some sort like "political career" or something like that and keep the introduction more clear and concise.
• Does the article link to other articles so it is more discoverable?
  • The information that was in the original article is linked, but nothing in the new information by the looks of it.

Overall impressions

Guiding questions:

• Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete?
  • There could be more information presented about her political career, personal life, etc.
• What are the strengths of the content added?
  • It allows for an understanding of how passionate Littlewood is for her constituents.
• How can the content added be improved?
  • More information on Littlewood and her life, as well as citations and sources for the information could be added.