User:Blasianmanda/Flipp Dinero/Kelleyschiedler 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?
- Blasianmanda
- Link to draft you're reviewing:
Lead
[edit]Guiding questions:
- Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer?
- Yes, but could be elaborated more on
- 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, introduces the reader to who the article is going to be about
- Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
- Article is primarily going to be focused on his career as a musicain but the Career section is not filled in yet.
- Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
- Very concise
Lead evaluation
[edit]Lead has a good start to it. Citations need to be added as well as some formatting, but this is just the draft. Since he is a less well-known artist there is not much more to include in the lead than already stated.
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?
- Not necessarily. A little confused on why featured songs are included, when there is already a whole discography on HIS music.
Content evaluation
[edit]Contents section makes sense for this article. I am only questioning the featured works section, as I am not sure how important or relevant that may be.
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?
- underrepresented because this article is not yet finished
- 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
- Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
- semi. needs to include more. article not yet done
- Are the sources current?
- yes
- 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?
- Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors?
- Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
Organization evaluation
[edit]Minor spelling and grammar errors that need to be fixed. Formatting needs improvement, but again this article is not yet finished
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?
- debatable
- Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
- yes
Images and media evaluation
[edit]Need help to understand how to make sure the image is adhering to the regulations.
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. But still needs work
- What are the strengths of the content added?
- pictures, early life enhancements
- How can the content added be improved?
- Career section can be filled in, journey to fame section if there is enough information on that.
Overall evaluation
[edit]Overall, I realize it is harder to find sources for smaller named artists as I too am struggling with. This article has little more work it needs to have done before it can go live. But making good progress!