User:Lizrileymga/Bibb Manufacturing Company/Ereed23 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? Lizrileymga
• Link to draft you're reviewing: Draft: Bibb Manufacturing Company

Lead

Guiding questions:

• Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer? Yes
• Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Yes
• Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? The only section of the article that the lead does not cover at present is the section on mill life.
• Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? No
• Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? The lead is very concise.

Lead evaluation

Your lead is really strong. My only suggestion is to include a brief statement that ties the mill life section into the rest of the lead.

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've done a good job at acquiring information from a variety of sources, and using each appropriately to add validity to the article throughout.

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

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? Yes

Sources and references evaluation

I noticed there are a couple places in the article where you've noted where you found the information but have not yet cited the source. Don't forget to go back to those before moving your edits to the main space.

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? Check the sentence "This transaction was completed in 1878." It looks like there's an extra space between "in" and "1878". Check the sentence "In 1919 employees of the mill requested that that the Land and mill be incorporated as a city."
• Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Yes, your article is organized in a very thoughtful manner that makes it easy to read and understand the progression of the company.

Images and Media

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

If you're able to find images that are in compliance with Wikipedia's image use policy, I think they would be a great addition to your article.

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? Yes
• How exhaustive is the list of sources? Does it accurately represent all available literature on the subject? There are currently ten sources, most of which are from newspapers. Are there any additional resources about the history of Macon that discuss the founding and development of Bibb Manufacturing as it relates to Macon.
• 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? Yes
• Does the article link to other articles so it is more discoverable? The article does not currently link to any other articles, but there are several opportunities to do so.

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? The article is very well organized and presents the information about the company in a way that is easy to understand.
• How can the content added be improved? Two quick ways to improve the article would be to take a few minutes to proofread and edit to catch some of the minor grammatical errors, as well as adding links to other Wikipedia articles.