User:Panswiki/Holy of Holies/Jvallentine1211 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? Panswiki
• Link to draft you're reviewing: User:Panswiki/Holy of Holies

Lead

Guiding questions:

• Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer? Not Applicable
• Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Not Applicable
• Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? Not Applicable
• Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? Not Applicable
• Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? Not Applicable

Content

Guiding questions:

• Is the content added relevant to the topic? Yes, the content being added is an update to the Holy of Holies page with information regarding Seventh Day Adventists.
• Is the content added up-to-date? Sources are a little bit on the older side, but the information appears to be current.
• Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? No.

Tone and Balance

Guiding questions:

• Is the content added neutral? Most of the content is neutral, but there is a source directly from the SDA website.
• Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? The aforementioned SDA source could contain bias toward a particular SDA view of the Holy of Holies.
• Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? No, the addendum to article is about SDA view of the Holy of Holies, so it represents only those views.
• Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? No.

Sources and References

Guiding questions:

• Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Two of the Three sources are from secondary sources, the third is the SDA article about the Holy of Holies, which could offer a biased, primary perspective.
• Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? Yes.
• Are the sources current? The secondary sources are from the Nineties, though I do not see an issue with this as we are dealing with a rather ancient concept in the Holy of Holies.
• Check a few links. Do they work? Yes!

Organization

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? The only issue I see stylistically is the way "The Seventh Day Adventism believes" reads. I'd try removing "The" in both instances, which should improve the flow of the article.
• Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Yes.

Images and Media

Guiding questions: If your peer added images or media Panswiki did not add any images or media.

• Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
• Are images well-captioned?
• Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
• Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?

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? Yes, the Holy of Holies article contained no information on SDA views of the Holy of Holies.
• What are the strengths of the content added? It contains good information on the SDA view of the Holy of Holies and is well written.
• How can the content added be improved? Try to find a non-primary source that can attest to the same things as the primary source, if possible!