User:Veronicajones72/Kitchenaid/Sedonap 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? Veronicajones72
• Link to draft you're reviewing: KitchenAid

Lead

Guiding questions: N/A

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

Content

Guiding questions:

• Is the content added relevant to the topic? Yes
• Is the content added up-to-date? Yes
• Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? no

Content evaluation

You added very good content about the stand mixer. It would also be interesting if you added more about the saleswomen. I think that if you take that approach, you can make the article much more interesting.

Tone and Balance

Guiding questions:

• Is the content added neutral? Yes
• Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? no
• 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

You were very neutral and unbiased, keep adding more non persuasive information like this.

Sources and References

Guiding questions:

• Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? yes
• 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? I had trouble with one link

Sources and references evaluation

All of your sources and citations looked correct, I only had trouble with one link though, but it might have just been my computer.

Organization

Guiding questions:

• Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? Yes, you did a very good job making this very easy to read.
• 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? yes

Organization evaluation

Although what you wrote was very un-opinionated, it is a little bit bland in some parts. Adding interesting facts would boost your edits and make the article much more interesting.

Images and Media

Guiding questions: If your peer added images or media N/A

• 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 N/A

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
• What are the strengths of the content added? You did a very good job with providing information that is unbiased and informative, and you wrote it in a very easy way to read.
• How can the content added be improved? Keep adding more content and interesting facts to help your edits.

Overall evaluation

Great work, just keep writing and working on your edits!