User:KeneliaWilliams/Obeah/DaltonSchultz 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? KeneliaWilliams
• Link to draft you're reviewing: Obeah

Lead

Guiding questions:

• Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer? Yes it has.
• Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Yes it does.
• Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? no, but it is an a section of an article. meaning it did not try to add a new section.
• Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?no it does not.
• Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? the lead is to the point.

Content

Guiding questions:

• Is the content added relevant to the topic? Yes I believe so.
• Is the content added up-to-date? Yes it is.
• Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? Not to my knowledge.

Tone and Balance

Guiding questions:

• Is the content added neutral? IT displays a neutral point.
• Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? None.
• Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? None.
• 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? Yes it is.
• Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? Yes they do.
• Are the sources current? Two of the three pieces are less than ten years old.
• Check a few links. Do they work? Yes they do.

Organization

Guiding questions:

• Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? IT is easy to read.
• Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors? One spelling error in the second paragraph the word serve has two S's.
• Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? It is a single section, but broken into smaller paragraphs.

Images and Media

Guiding questions: If your peer added images or media

• Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? Doesn't add a picture.
• Are images well-captioned? N/a
• Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? N/a
• Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? N/a

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? Yes it does.
• How exhaustive is the list of sources? Does it accurately represent all available literature on the subject? Her addition does use all her sources.
• 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? Added inside an existing part so not much to change.
• Does the article link to other articles so it is more discoverable? No added links.

Overall impressions

Guiding questions:

• Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete? The article does add a comparison which does help the article.
• What are the strengths of the content added? Comparing it to Jamaica helps understanding it.
• How can the content added be improved? Just adding more information all together.

Overall evaluation

Good start to editing an article.