User:Looganealabbas/Punu people /Johns9ea Peer Review

Peer review

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

Guiding questions:

Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer?
- There is no lead for the article.
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?

Guiding questions:

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.

Guiding questions:

Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
- I'm assuming it is. I do not have access to the book used.
Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
- I found a few articles that had more information regarding Punu art, but the information added is useful.
Are the sources current?
- Yes. They are from 2008.
Check a few links. Do they work?
- Yes.

Guiding questions:

Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
- It is written in a way that makes sense.
Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors?
- There are a few sentences that could be split up into two. For example, I would write: "The masks are life size, they can cover a persons face, they are worn by the dancers in south Gabon." as "The masks are life sized, meaning that they cover a person's entire face. They are worn by dancers in South Gabon."
- I see no spelling errors.
Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
- Yes. My only suggestion is to have the heading say "Art" rather than "Punu Art" since it is already an article about the Punu.

Guiding questions: If your peer added images or media

Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
- Yes.
Are images well-captioned?
- The caption could include the type of mask it is.
Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
- I believe so.
Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
- To enhance the appeal of the image, I would place it to the right of the information rather than at the bottom.

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?

Guiding questions:

Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete?
- Yes. Adding this section helps the future reader understand more about Punu culture.
What are the strengths of the content added?
- The information is clear and helpful. It is cited correctly.
How can the content added be improved?
- There are a few grammar mistakes as well as sentences that could be cleaned up a little bit. I would add more information about the masks and maybe even another section about a different kind of Punu art.