User:Agsangal/User:Gfasig/sandbox/Agsangal 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? Gfasig
• Link to draft you're reviewing: User:Gfasig/sandbox

Lead

Guiding questions:

• Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer?

Yes. My peer has added new content to his lead. However it is just bullet points for now.

• Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?

Yes. One of his bullet points clearly a describes the topic

• Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?

Yes.

• Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?

Since the article is not completed, the lead is a little vague.

• Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?

I think once this lead is fully written out, it will be detailed.

Content

Guiding questions:

• Is the content added relevant to the topic? Yes.
• Is the content added up-to-date?

Yes it has current Korean American Coalition chapters

• Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?

The article is just bullet points. However, I think if my peer elaborates these topics it will be extremely informative.

Tone and Balance

Guiding questions:

• Is the content added neutral?

Yes

• Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?

There are no claims.

• Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?

His general viewpoint is pretty vague at the moment.

• Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?

No. This is a neutral viewpoint

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?

His bullets are clear and concise. They just need to become sentences.

• 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.

Images and Media

Guiding questions: If your peer added images or media

• Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?

This article has no 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

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?

Yes.

• 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?

It is not fully complete but it has enough information to create all the necessary components for a good article.

• Does the article link to other articles so it is more discoverable?

No.

Overall impressions

Guiding questions:

• Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete?

Yes it is.

• What are the strengths of the content added?

There is more elaboration

• How can the content added be improved?

It can be put into sentences