User:Ahdavis07/The Quadroons (short story)/Jaunarra 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? The Quadroons
• Link to draft you're reviewing:User:Ahdavis07/The Quadroons (short story)

Lead

Guiding questions:

• Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer? No
• Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? No. here is a background of the story. But not an actual lead to say hey, this is what this article is unless that is the background.
• Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? Yes it does.
• Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? No
• Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? No, more detail could be added

Content

Guiding questions:

• Is the content added relevant to the topic? Yes the content is relevant
• Is the content added up-to-date? Things are up to date.
• Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? of course, there is more that can be added to go more into depth with the story

Tone and Balance

Guiding questions:

• Is the content added neutral? yes, it is not anything that is favored more
• Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? To be honest I did not see any claims
• 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, the information given does make the story interesting and makes it a story that should be read.

Sources and References

Guiding questions:

• Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Yes, it all has references.
• Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? yes they do
• Are the sources current? I think they are current
• Check a few links. Do they work? Yes the links work. They took me too the article or source that was used

Organization

Guiding questions:

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

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? So far, no images
• Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?no images
• Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? no images

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, there are more that 2-3
• How exhaustive is the list of sources? Does it accurately represent all available literature on the subject? Not too exhaustive. Enough to cover what they are using
• 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?Yes it does
• Does the article link to other articles so it is more discoverable? Yes, it links to things that gives more information

Overall impressions

Guiding questions:

• Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete? It added to it. It spiced up the story
• What are the strengths of the content added?
• How can the content added be improved? With more info and give the readers more than what is being given