User:Zarens/Torah ark/VQuiche 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? Zarens
- Link to draft you're reviewing User:Zarens/Torah ark:
Lead
[edit]Guiding questions:
- 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?
Lead evaluation
[edit]Review: Lead is adequate and does describe the topic, but content is still in progress so I can't say if it covers what the major sections are. It is concise however.
Content
[edit]Guiding questions:
- Is the content added relevant to the topic? The content that is there is relevant
- Is the content added up-to-date?
- Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
Content evaluation
[edit]The content is relevant and up-to-date from what I see but because it's still a WIP it's hard to tell what's missing especially since I don't have knowledge of the subject. The basics are there though.
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 favor of one position or away from another?
Tone and balance evaluation
[edit]No biased points; points that are there are neutral and aren't overrepresented nor underrepresented
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]The sources that are available are feliable, current, and functioning
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]The content that exists currently meets the criteria but there is still a lot in progress.
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]No images at the moment
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]It can't be said yet because a lot is still in progress.