User:OrangeAdam/Mary Setrakian/StudentEditorWiki Peer Review
![]() | Peer review
Complete your peer review exercise below, providing as much constructive criticism as possible. The more detailed suggestions you provide, the more useful it will be to your classmate. Make sure you consider each of the following aspects: LeadGuiding questions:
ContentGuiding questions:
Tone and BalanceGuiding questions:
Sources and ReferencesGuiding questions:
OrganizationGuiding questions:
Images and MediaGuiding questions: If your peer added images or media
For New Articles OnlyIf the draft you're reviewing is for a new article, consider the following in addition to the above.
Overall impressionsGuiding questions:
Examples of good feedbackA good article evaluation can take a number of forms. The most essential things are to clearly identify the biggest shortcomings, and provide specific guidance on how the article can be improved.
Additional Resources |
General info
[edit]- Whose work are you reviewing?
OrangeAdam
- Link to draft you're reviewing
- User:OrangeAdam/Mary Setrakian
- Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
- Does not exist
Evaluate the drafted changes
[edit]The lead of the article begins with a clear and explanatory introduction of Mary Setrakian.
The content of the article is relevant and seems up-to-date with her notable accomplishments in her life. Evidently, there is probably more to say about Mary Setrakian. However, this is a good overview and introduction of Mary Setrakian. Good job!
Tone and balance of the article is neutral. You clearly state facts, rather than generalizations or any opinions. There are no claims that seem bias.
Sources and references are appropriately used and placed. Each fact is identified and backed-up by a reference. However, it seems as though two of your references (3 and 4) are directly from her website. Based on the Wikipedia guidelines, I think these would be considered primary sources rather than secondary sources. Therefore, it would make it more reliable (under Wikipedia's guidelines) to use sources independent on the subject.
The organization of the content is clear and well organized with subheading and follows the Wikipedia formate. I have not found any grammatical or spelling errors.
- For the purposes of clarity, I would simply make a small adjustment where you write "since she was 17" and I would add the part I have underlined "since she was 17 years old".
- Small adjustment, title in italics: "her role in Hello, Dolly! on Broadway"
For a new article, Mary Setrakian seems to have been a good choice to add to the Wikipedia articles. She seems like a notable person to write about.
- As highly suggested by Wikipedia, I would include some hyperlinks to other Wikipedia articles. For example: San Francisco, California, Les Misérables, Phantom of the Opera, The Lion King, etc. This will allow your article to be more "discoverable" as Wikipedia suggests.
Overall impressions/comments
Good choice of topic, an interesting article to discover!
If you could figure out/have the time to add a photo of Mary Setrakian, I think that would be a really nice addition to your article and make it complete :)