User:15jlittle/Aquatic rat/Kim.kevin1 Peer Review

Peer review edit

This is where you will complete your peer review exercise. Please use the following template to fill out your review.

General info edit

  • Whose work are you reviewing? (15jlittle)
  • Link to draft you're reviewing:Aquatic rat

Lead edit

Guiding questions:

  • Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer? The lead has been interesting
  • Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? It does include an introductory sentence
  • Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? It create a brief description of the article's major sections
  • Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? It does include information that is not present in the article.
  • Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? It is concise.

Lead evaluation edit

Content edit

Guiding questions:

  • Is the content added relevant to the topic? The content is relevant to the topic
  • Is the content added up-to-date? The content added up to date.
  • Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? There is no content that is missing maybe more information on prey.

Content evaluation edit

Tone and Balance edit

Guiding questions:

  • Is the content added neutral? The content is neutral.
  • Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? There is no biased toward a particular position.
  • Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? There are no viewpoints that is overrepresented or underrepresented.
  • Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? It does not persuade the reader in a certain direction. It was more factual, which was good.

Tone and balance evaluation edit

Sources and References edit

Guiding questions:

  • Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? It is backed by a reliable secondary source of information.
  • Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? They do reflect the available literature on the topic.
  • Are the sources current? The sources are current.
  • Check a few links. Do they work? The links did work.

Sources and references evaluation edit

Organization edit

Guiding questions:

  • Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? It is well written.
  • Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors? There was no grammatical or spelling errors.
  • Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? The content is well-organized.

Organization evaluation edit

Images and Media edit

Guiding questions: If your peer added images or media N/A The peer did not add any 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 edit

For New Articles Only edit

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? There was more than 2-3 reliable sources.
  • How exhaustive is the list of sources? Does it accurately represent all available literature on the subject? 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? It does contain a necessary infoboxes, section headings, and so on.
  • Does the article link to other articles so it is more discoverable? It is easily discoverable.

New Article Evaluation edit

Overall impressions edit

Guiding questions:

  • Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete? The article is more complete compared to last time.
  • What are the strengths of the content added? Added more sections.
  • How can the content added be improved? More information in these sections.

Overall evaluation edit