User:Abc 49/Sentence/Superduperdog Peer Review
Peer review for Abc 49 by Superduperdog
[edit]General info
[edit]- Whose work are you reviewing? Abc 49
- Link to draft you're reviewing: Sentence
No bibliography or original article tagged.
Lead
[edit]Lead evaluation:
[edit]Based on what I am able to see on their page, there is no lead on the page or on the original article. I'm unsure whether or not it clearly describes the article's topic, etc..
Content
[edit]Content evaluation:
[edit]The content is relative to the topic of sentences. It seems as though it is up-to-date. It doesn't seem like there is content that is missing or that doesn't belong.
Tone and Balance
[edit]Tone and balance evaluation:
[edit]The content that is added seems very neutral, not heavily biased toward a particular position. There aren't any viewpoints that are overrepresented or underrepresented.
Sources and References
[edit]Sources and references evaluation:
[edit]There are not any sources listed on this additional information page or on the biblography.
Organization
[edit]Organization evaluation:
[edit]The new content from what I can tell is well-written as it is concise, clear, and easy to read as they added categories such as common uses and art, media, and entertainment. It doesn't contain any grammatical or spelling errors. The content added is well-organized as its broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic.
Images and Media
[edit]Images and media evaluation:
[edit]My peer didn't add any images or media from what I can see on their portion of the article.
Overall impressions
[edit]Overall evaluation:
[edit]There is no bibliography added to this edited article portion. Yes, the content added improved the overall quality of the article as it adds categories that weren't talked about it. Some of the strengths of the content are new categories or questions asked. The content can be improved by adding a bibliography and sources or references.