User:Tavleenbhatia/Global journalism/Gracemavko 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? Tavleenbhatia
- Link to draft you're reviewing: Global journalism
Lead
[edit]Guiding questions:
- Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer?
- Yes, the lead accurately explores the content added.
- Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
- The topic sentence encompasses each element of the article topic.
- Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
- There isn't major sections yet other than a definition, so I think yes it does.
- Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
- No.
- Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
- No.
Lead evaluation
[edit]10/10
Content
[edit]Guiding questions:
- Is the content added relevant to the topic?
- Is the content added up-to-date?
- Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
- I think in later additions, more background on the scholarly work behind global journalism will be a nice addition to the page.
Content evaluation
[edit]9/10
Tone and Balance
[edit]Guiding questions:
- Is the content added neutral?
- Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
- Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
- Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favour of one position or away from another?
Tone and balance evaluation
[edit]10/10 It is made clear in the lead that this is a conceptual exploration of a perspective, so the tone that is represented is a display of that.
Sources and References
[edit]Guiding questions:
- Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
- Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
- Are the sources current?
- Check a few links. Do they work?
Sources and references evaluation
[edit]10/10
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]10/10. Easy to understand for an average Wikipedia user! Great way to explain the topic and back up with sources, but make easy to understand.
Images and Media
[edit]Guiding questions: If your peer added 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?
Images and media evaluation
[edit]This article needs visual aid! I definitely recommend adding pictures.
Overall impressions
[edit]Guiding questions:
- Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete?
- What are the strengths of the content added?
- How can the content added be improved?
Overall evaluation
[edit]8.5/10! I think this is a great addition to Wikipedia, but is in need of pictures and more information.