User:Gabriela N. Dominguez/Ligature (medicine)/Yairelizvg 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) Gabriela N. Dominguez (http://dashboard.wikiedu.org/users/Gabriela%20N.%20Dominguez)
Link to draft you're reviewing: User:Gabriela N. Dominguez/Ligature (medicine)

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

The lead of the article is very clear and concise, it says exactly what a ligature is.

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

The article is quite short for a medical procedure. So I think it could contain a lot more information, depending on the sources you have.

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 tone and balance of the article is neutral, remember to keep it that way when adding your information and working on it.

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

The dates of the references of the article are somewhat old, try to find a little more up to dated information and add the sources.

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 in the article is quite organized, it has three sections with information. As I mentioned earlier, you may be able to improve the information while maintaining accuracy.

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?

Images and media evaluation

The article only contains one image, which is fine. If you can find more images with better quality and add them or change the one that would be fine.

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

Based on your sandbox, you might have struggled with where you should work on the article. I recommend you to paste it there and start working as soon as possible. Maybe you can add information on where the ligatures can be done, and extend the history section. I could not gave you that much suggestions, but I know that you can work and imporve the article.