User:Sammyturch/George Baird/Ohsun 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?
  • Sammy Turch
• Link to draft you're reviewing:
  • User:Sammyturch/George Baird

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?
  • yes, sort of - this could be improved
• Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
  • no
• Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
  • concise and gets to the point

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

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

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?
  • no
• Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
  • yes, but perhaps paragraphs can be broken down further to allow for easy reading by viewers

Images and Media

Guiding questions: If your peer added images or media

• Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
  • there are no images as of yet
• 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

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?
• 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?
  • yes, I believe so
• What are the strengths of the content added?
  • deeper dive into Baird's professional background and ideologies
• How can the content added be improved?
  • better organization and breaking down of paragraphs to allow for easier reading

Overall evaluation

- very good, well written and planned out. Provides thorough information about Baird.