User:ZimuW/Wu Jianren/Mobinwang 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? (provide username) ZimuW
• Link to draft you're reviewing: User:ZimuW/Wu Jianren

Lead

Guiding questions:

• Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer?
• Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
• Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
• Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
• Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?

Lead evaluation

I think the lead is very concise. Since this article is mainly used to introduce a historical figure, I think the lead may be able to add a part of the life introduction about Wu Jiaren as a start. From the perspective of the lead, what I can speculate is author is going to introduce Wu Jiaren's narrator and the skills of focusing the characters in detail. Regarding the sentence "Wu Jianren wrote the most articles in the group of writers who answered Liang Qichao's call.", the place where it appeared was a bit abrupt, and I did not understand his response to Liang Qichao's call and his novels has deeply affected modern Chinese novel has any causal relationship.

Content

Guiding questions:

• Is the content added relevant to the topic?
• Is the content added up-to-date?
• Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
• Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?

Content evaluation

This article deals with a topic related to the underrepresented population in history. Judging from the current progress, the author's edited content is related to this topic.

Tone and Balance

Guiding questions:

• Is the content added neutral?
• Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
• Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
• Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?

Tone and balance evaluation

The article is relatively neutral, and there are no claims that seem to be heavily biased towards a particular position. However, the relationship between Wu Jiaren and Liang Qichao is a bit vague. Is there any mutual influence between them? Why should author specifically mention Liang Qichao instead of others when supplementing Wu Jiaren's information?

Sources and References

Guiding questions:

• Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
• Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
• Are the sources current?
• Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
• Check a few links. Do they work?

Sources and references evaluation

Although the information is not much, the sources are relatively reliable, and they are all valid links. I checked Hanan Patrick's essay's, which did involve some introductions and descriptions about Wu Jiaren.

Organization

Guiding questions:

• Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
• Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors?
• Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?

Organization evaluation

The content at this stage is well-written, which is relatively concise and easy to understand. There are no obvious grammatical errors. But maybe the author has not started to classify the narrative, so I can't comment on whether the content is well-organized.

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?
• 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?

Overall impressions

Guiding questions:

• Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete?
• What are the strengths of the content added?
• How can the content added be improved?

Overall evaluation

The added content opened up a new perspective for me, as a reader who read this article for the first time. In addition to the original introduction about Wu Jiaren's unique narrative skills, I am also very curious about his relationship with Liang Qichao in history. Is there any interaction between them on the literary or political level? If the author thinks that the existing part of the original article does not need to be revised, and there has enough reliable academic source, then you can also choose to open a new section to introduce other parts of Wu Jiaren.