User:MGR444/I.Am.Gia/Jaylacnguyen Peer Review

Peer review

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?
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?
Is the content added up-to-date?
Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?

Tone and Balance

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?

Sources and References

Guiding questions:

Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
Does the content accurately reflect what the cited sources say? (You'll need to refer to the sources to check this.)
Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
Are the sources current?
Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
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.)
Check a few links. Do they work?

Organization

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?

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?

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?
What are the strengths of the content added?
How can the content added be improved?

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.

Peer review of "Homemaking"
Peer review of this article about a famous painting

Additional Resources

Check out the Editing Wikipedia PDF for general editing tips and suggestions.

General info

Whose work are you reviewing?

MGR444

Link to draft you're reviewing
I.Am.Gia
Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
I.Am.Gia

Evaluate the drafted changes

Lead

Guiding questions:

The lead introductory sentence accurately describes what the topic of the article is. However, there are no brief descriptions of the article's major sections. The founder of the clothing brand could be placed in the introductory paragraph.

Content

The content in the article is completely relevant, up-to-date, and does not have any content that does not belong. A detail that could be added is the type of fashion the brand is known for and, could include images of examples of its best-selling pieces. In the media section, it could be appealing to add a few images of those celebrities and models wearing the clothes from the brand. This section could also include how the brand conducts campaigns to reach its audience and "build hype."

Other potential sections could include any concerns regarding sustainability, any controversies that brand has had, the brands influence on trends and other brands, statistics of revenue growth and expansion, and investors of the company.

Tone and Balance

The content seems neutral and unbiased, however the emphasis on success could come across as favorable. There could be an additional section on criticism to improve neutrality.

Sources and References

The content seems to have sources that may not be deemed as the most reliable to serve as factual claims. Perhaps consumer psychology related to fast fashion referencing the brand or academic article's referencing the brand could be more reliable references.

Organization

The content is easy to read, well organized and does not have any grammatical errors.

Images and Media

A few images can be added to make the article more visually appealing to the reader.

Overall impressions

Overall the article has had many great changes regarding recent updates of the brand this year. This is a great start and has much potential to improve! I think adding images and additional sections from the topics provided above can really strengthen the article. Keep up the great work!