User:Cgonz527/Environmental science/Ahuezo004 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) Cgonz527
• Link to draft you're reviewing: Environmental science

Lead

Guiding questions:

• Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer? The lead has not been updated, but the content added by my peer is reflective in the lead.
• Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Yes, it defines what Environmental Science is.
• Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? Yes, it does include the major sections.
• Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? From my understanding, the lead does not give information that is not discussed in the article.
• Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? The lead provides a lot of information but is not overly detailed.

Content

Guiding questions:

• Is the content added relevant to the topic? Yes the content is relevant.
• Is the content added up-to-date? The content could be more up to date.
• Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? All the content belongs in the article.

Tone and Balance

Guiding questions:

• Is the content added neutral? Yes, the content added didn't mean to persuade the reader into a certain bias.
• Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? No heavily biased claims.
• Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? No viewpoint is over or underrepresented.
• Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? No, the content is factual and does not persuade the reader.

Sources and References

Guiding questions:

• Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Yes the content is backed up by reliable sources.
• Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? The sources are thorough.
• Are the sources current? The sources are current.
• Check a few links. Do they work? The links work.

Organization

Guiding questions:

• Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? The content is easy to read.
• Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors? I did not see any spelling errors.
• Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Yes, content is well organized.

Images and Media

Guiding questions: If your peer added images or media

• Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? There are images but not new added one.
• Are images well-captioned? N/A
• Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? N/A
• Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? N/A

Overall impressions

Guiding questions:

• Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete? The article appears to include relevant information that was missing prior.
• What are the strengths of the content added? The information was not provided in other parts of the article.
• How can the content added be improved? I think images can help enhance the updated section.