User:Ngeer20/Syntrophobacter wolinii/Ortiz.carolina 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: LeadGuiding questions:
ContentGuiding questions:
Tone and BalanceGuiding questions:
Sources and ReferencesGuiding questions:
OrganizationGuiding questions:
Images and MediaGuiding questions: If your peer added images or media
For New Articles OnlyIf the draft you're reviewing is for a new article, consider the following in addition to the above.
Overall impressionsGuiding questions:
Examples of good feedbackA 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.
Additional Resources |
General info
[edit]- Whose work are you reviewing?
Ngeer20
- Link to draft you're reviewing
- User:Ngeer20/Syntrophobacter wolinii
- Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
- Syntrophobacter wolinii
Evaluate the drafted changes
[edit]Lead
[edit]- Guiding questions
- Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
- Yes, it's very specific.
- 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?
- Yes, in general.
- Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
- It is short and concise. It is 4 sentences.
Content
[edit]- Guiding questions
- Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
- Yes it is. Is limited.
- Is the content up-to-date?
- Yes.
- Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
- N/A
- 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
[edit]- Guiding questions
- Is the article 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 article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
- No
Sources and References
[edit]- Guiding questions
- Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
- Yes, in general.
- Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
- Yes
- Are the sources current?
- Yes
- Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
- Check a few links. Do they work?
Organization
[edit]- Guiding questions
- Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
- It is easy to read and understand. It is very concise and specific.
- Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
- No.
- Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
- Yes, it is divided into 3 sections.
Images and Media
[edit]- Guiding questions
- Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
- No, the article does not have images.
- Are images well-captioned?
- N/A
- Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
- N/A
- Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
- N/A
Overall impressions
[edit]- Guiding questions
- What is the article's overall status?
- It's a good article but more information is needed.
- What are the article's strengths?
- it's easy to understand.
- How can the article be improved?
- More information.
- How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
- It is a well developed article.