User:Aliyahm/Chelsea cutler/Chen1649 Peer Review

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

Lead

edit

Guiding questions:

  • Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer? Yes
  • Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Yes, the lead contains the basic information and birth date of the singer
  • Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? no
  • Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? yes, the birthdate is not present in the rest of the article
  • Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? It is concise

Lead evaluation

edit

Content

edit

Guiding questions:

  • Is the content added relevant to the topic? Yes
  • Is the content added up-to-date? Yes
  • Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?

Content evaluation

edit

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
  • Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? No

Tone and balance evaluation

edit

Sources and References

edit

Guiding questions:

  • Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Yes, most of them are from billboard and reliable websites. But one source is from twitter in which it is not so much reliable.
  • Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? yes they do
  • Are the sources current? yes they are
  • Check a few links. Do they work? yes

Sources and references evaluation

edit

Organization

edit

Guiding questions:

  • Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? It is very easy to read and concise. More details are needed
  • 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?

Organization evaluation

edit

Images and Media

edit

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

edit

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?
  • 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?

New Article Evaluation

edit

Overall impressions

edit

Guiding questions:

  • Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete? Yes, the content improved the overall quality of the article, yet it still need more details and sections of information
  • What are the strengths of the content added? the content follows a clear chronological order, and all the information is well-sited.
  • How can the content added be improved? More information about this singer's background, awards, shows or tours.

Overall evaluation

edit