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:
Lead
Guiding questions:
Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer?
No
Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
Yes, however, it is weak.
Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
No
Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
No
Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
It does not include the necessary information
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 the content covers everything
Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?
No, the watermelon symbol is greatly known.
Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:
Is the content added neutral?
Yes it is
Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
No, as it concisely explains the meaning behind the symbol.
Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
No, it is neutral.
Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
No, the content is added to raise awareness.
Sources and References
Guiding questions:
Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
Yes, it is also referenced.
Does the content accurately reflect what the cited sources say? (You'll need to refer to the sources to check this.)
Yes, it does.
Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
Yes, they are.
Are the sources current?
Yes, published in 2024.
Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
Yes, the content matches the topic.
Are there better sources available, such as peer-reviewed articles in place of news coverage or random websites? (You may need to do some digging to answer this.)
Yes, one source may not be enough. WorldCat has many peer-reviwed articles on the topic.
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, the content is very clear and concise.
Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors?
No, it is well-written.
Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
Yes, it is split into two parts, followed by an “Examples” paragraph.
Images and Media
Guiding questions: If your peer added images or media
No 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?
For New Articles Only
If the draft you're reviewing is for 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, as it added all the necessary information to complete the article.
What are the strengths of the content added?
Raised awareness about a very important topic that is not completely understood by people.
How can the content added be improved?
By using more sources.
Examples of good feedback
A 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.
