User:EmDom521/Fred Mhalu/Meticulousonion 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? (provide username)
  • EmDom521
• Link to draft you're reviewing:
  • User:EmDom521/sandbox

Lead

Guiding questions:

• Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer?
  • Yes (new page)
• Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
  • Yes
• Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
  • Yes
• Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
  • Yes, the information on his current work
• Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
  • Nice and concise

Lead evaluation

I think your lead is in a very good place, just needs a bit of copy editing and it's good.

Content

Guiding questions:

• Is the content added relevant to the topic?
  • Yes
• Is the content added up-to-date?
  • Yes, to the best of my knowledge
• Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
  • No

Content evaluation

You have done great work to locate and compile information on the subject. Great work!

Tone and Balance

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

The facts presented in the article are not trying to persuade a reader toward one viewpoint or another. It is nicely balanced and does a great job presenting information on the subject.

Sources and References

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?
  • From what I was able to see briefly online, yes
• Are the sources current?
  • Yes
• Check a few links. Do they work?
  • Yes

Sources and references evaluation

Sources look good and the links within the article are great!

Organization

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?
  • Mostly. there were a few places where sentences could be simplified a little to make them clearer.
• Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
  • Yes, if possible it may help to have subheadings within the career section.

Organization evaluation

Before moving this over to Wiki, it would be worth giving it a read through from start to finish as if you didn't know anything about the subject.

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?
• Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
• Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?

Images and media evaluation

If you could find some images of the university or something like that it could be a bit more appealing to a reader.

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
• How exhaustive is the list of sources? Does it accurately represent all available literature on the subject?
  • From a historical perspective, it is great.
• 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?
  • Infobox may be helpful to gather biographical information in a quick glance.(there's a template under the insert menu)
• Does the article link to other articles so it is more discoverable?
  • Yes, many times.

New Article Evaluation

It is very solid first entry for an article.

Overall impressions

Guiding questions:

• Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete?
• What are the strengths of the content added?
• How can the content added be improved?

Overall evaluation

You did great work finding resources to support this biography. The writing is excellent and just needs some formatting upgrades and a proof for clarity to be ready to publish.