User:BeeHiatt/Tokyo Auto Salon/Joshjensen308 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]- Whose work are you reviewing? (provide username) Brandon Hyatt
- Link to draft you're reviewing:User:BeeHiatt/Tokyo Auto Salon
Lead
[edit]Guiding questions:
- Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer? Yes./NA
- Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? yes./NA
- Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? yes./NA
- Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?no/NA
- Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? no
Lead evaluation
[edit]I assume they are talking about the first paragraph of the article. I couldn't see the lead in your articles draft but I don't think that what you added would have changed it in a hugely spectacular way, So I am sure you are good.
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? No
Content evaluation
[edit]The content that you added is pretty good. It seems to be great for explaining the venue and what the reactions were to it.
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]you did really well with the tone of the things you added being neutral but still entertaining.
Sources and References
[edit]Guiding questions:
- Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? not all of it.
- Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? the one I saw did.
- Are the sources current? Yes
- Check a few links. Do they work? yes
Sources and references evaluation
[edit]You have one good source, I would like to see a few more put in. or more of that source near all the information. if iyou need to source the same thing after every sentence I think that would be better on wikipedia then just sourcing the beginning and the end. but I am not the wikipedia master so for now just some more sources would be sweet.
Organization
[edit]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? NO
- Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Yes
Organization evaluation
[edit]very clear and concise.
Images and Media
[edit]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? yes
- Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? yes
- Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? yes
Images and media evaluation
[edit]that was a dope pic man.
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?
- What are the strengths of the content added?
- How can the content added be improved?
Overall evaluation
[edit]overall I think the things you added were great, I just think you could use a few more sources to back up the facts you put in. I like the picture and I like the article though.