Jump to content

User:Ivana Yizhang Li/Art therapy/Yonna95 Peer Review

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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]
  • Whose work are you reviewing? (Ivana Yizhang)
  • Link to draft you're reviewing: User:Ivana Yizhang Li/Art therapy

Lead

[edit]

Guiding questions:

  • Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer? No not yet
  • Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Not yet
  • Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? Not yet
  • Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? Not yet
  • Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? No

Lead evaluation

[edit]

Waiting for a Lead to be created...but other information has been developed.

Content

[edit]

Guiding questions:

  • Is the content added relevant to the topic? Yes the User:Ivana Yizhang Li/Art therapy has uploaded a case.
  • Is the content added up-to-date? Yes
  • Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? Content that is missing are Definition, History of art therapy, Schizophrenia, Art therapy and Depression.

Content evaluation

[edit]

Add information to the blank Headers such as Definition History of Art therapy etc.

Tone and Balance

[edit]

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, I think the viewpoints that are there are represented very well.
  • Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? No

Tone and balance evaluation

[edit]

Tone and balance is very good no persuasion anyway.

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]

The User:Ivana Yizhang Li/Art therapy sources and references are accurate and useful for her Article but needs more sources she only has 4.

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]

The organization of the article is well done and includes Art Therapy instructions and outcomes of one particular participant

Images and Media

[edit]

Guiding questions: If your peer added images or media

  • Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? Yes its one of the participants work.
  • Are images well-captioned? Sort of...its missing the year it was possibly published but when you click it your able to see everything.
  • Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? I think this one particular image does
  • Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? Yes

Images and media evaluation

[edit]

If its possible to upload at least 2-3 more images and a video that is instructional base of Art therapy? I think these will help explore the article more in depth and draw more viewers to it.

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? Yes
  • How exhaustive is the list of sources? Does it accurately represent all available literature on the subject? The list only contains 4 sources, and yes.
  • 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? Sort of
  • Does the article link to other articles so it is more discoverable? Not really

New Article Evaluation

[edit]

Find a way to link other articles to your article.

Overall impressions

[edit]

Guiding questions:

  • Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete? Not yet
  • What are the strengths of the content added? The strengths of the article is art therapy instructions and cases, you do not really see that in Wikipedia
  • How can the content added be improved? Filling out the missing paragraphs under the headers.

Overall evaluation

[edit]

Hopefully the User:Ivana Yizhang Li/Art therapy finish uploading the missing information.