User:Fraj0103/Salma Zahid/Marchnonreal 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? Fraj0103
• Link to draft you're reviewing: User:Fraj0103/Salma Zahid

Lead

Guiding questions:

• Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer?
  • Yes. A lot of the content included Zahid's 2019 election campaign.
• Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
  • Immediately, 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?
  • All information is present.
• Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
  • All the information presented is moderately detailed.

Lead evaluation

5/5

Content

Guiding questions:

• Is the content added relevant to the topic?
  • All of the content has to do with her most recent campaign. All of the references are from the last few years.
• Is the content added up-to-date?
  • Yes
• Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
  • No

Content evaluation

5/5

Tone and Balance

Guiding questions:

• Is the content added neutral?
  • Everything written comes off as entirely neutral.
• Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
  • No, entirely unbiased.
• 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

5/5

Sources and References

Guiding questions:

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

Sources and references evaluation

5/5

Organization

Guiding questions:

• Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
  • All contents of the article are well-written.
• 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?
  • Very well-organized.

Organization evaluation

5/5

Images and Media

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?
  • I think so.
• Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
  • Yes

Images and media evaluation

5/5

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?
• 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?

Overall impressions

Guiding questions:

• Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete?
  • Definitely, yes.
• What are the strengths of the content added?
  • More information and coverage on Salma's political endeavours.
• How can the content added be improved?
  • Maybe use Wikipedia's API to include a fixture for Selma's most recent election results. If there is one.

Overall evaluation

25/25