User:Cameronsimons24/American Sports Activism/Dingers99 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?

Cameronsimons24

Link to draft you're reviewing
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Cameronsimons24/American_Sports_Activism?veaction=edit&preload=Template%3ADashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template
Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
N/A

Evaluate the drafted changes

(Compose a detailed peer review here, considering each of the key aspects listed above if it is relevant. Consider the guiding questions, and check out the examples of what feedback looks like.)

Lead:

The lead paragraph provides some solid information on the topic. For example, it talks about former sports activists such as Jackie Robinson and also current sports activists such as Lebron James and Colin Kaepernick. The paragraph provides some brief details on what these people have done to use their platform to advance causes that they believe in. I think it could definitely use some more sources. I know it's still early and I'm sure you're planning on adding more but that would be my first suggestion. I think the lead paragraph comes off as more of a narative instead of an encyclopedia. There are lead statements such as the first sentence, "Professional sports in the United States play a pivotal part in the culture of the United States." This sounds like it's trying to lead the reader to a particular conclusion. I would try to find a source to back this claim. I would also focus on making the lead more of a summary of the main points of the article.

Content:

The content you have is solid. It looks like you're planning on adding more sections as well which I think is a great idea. It is relevant to the topic and up to date. All of the content belongs in the article. The only thing I would say is to focus on adding more sources.

Tone and Balance:

The tone and balance is neutral for the most part. I think the body sections after the lead are extremely neutral. They do a good job of just presenting facts about the topic. I did think the lead was not quite as balanced although I already mentioned that. I don't think their are any viewpoints that are over or underrepresented. The paragraphs that you are planning on including seem like good paragraphs to include and I'm sure you'll be able to make them relevant to the topic.

Sources and References:

The sources you have are great. They are relevant to the topic. The links I clicked on worked for me. I would just focus on adding some more of them.

Organization:

Your sentences and paragraphs are organized. The content is clear and well written. It is also concise. It doesn't seem too wordy.

Images and Media:

There are no images in the article. It may help to add pictures of the people you mention. For example, adding a picture of Jackie Robinson.

Overall Impressions:

Overall, this is a solid article. I think the sections you have are concise and well written. I think the sections you plan to add are relevant and will help the reader understand more about the topic. The biggest thing I would work on is adding more sources. You could also add images and make the lead paragraph a little less like a narrative and more like an encyclopedia.