User:Baldvegan123/Poltergeist/Laurenharper02 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?

Baldvegan123

Link to draft you're reviewing
User:Baldvegan123/Poltergeist
Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
Poltergeist

Peer Review

Lead:

They added to the lead section. Their explanation made me intrigued about what the rest of the article is about. One thing I would point out is that in the introduction paragraph that you are adding to, you give many facts. While they are interesting, I am not 100% sure the introductory paragraph needs them. I would fix that by just pointing out small things that the rest of the sections of the article are going to talk about. Again,I believe you did a wonderful job of grabbing your audience's attention, but that is something I would keep in mind.

Content:

I believe that the content is super interesting and relevant! Awesome job! I definitely will be looking forward to reading more about this topic in the future.

Tone and Balance:

I did not see any personal opinions and you kept the topics neutral. That is difficult to do when you are writing about something you are interested in, good job!

Sources and References:

I did not have access to your bibliography, so I would make sure to double check your sources and make sure they are reliable.

Organization:

I did not come across any grammatical errors. I am unsure about this, so maybe ask Dr. Vetter. When you added to the section "Ed and Lorraine Warren" and you listed cases that they investigated, do those need to be in quotation marks? I have no clue, but that would be a question I would possibly ask.
You stated new facts and added new information in a way that was not wordy or hard to understand!

Images and Media:

No added images or media.

Overall Impression:

I believe you completed this article draft successfully. All of your content was relevant and I feel as though if it is eventually added to the actual Wikipedia article that it would make the article better. You kept your information neutral and you organized the facts in a way that was easy to understand. Wikipedia is a great place to start research on a certain topic and I feel as though researchers will want to look further into Poltergeist after reading this Wikipedia article. When I read this sentence in your introductory paragraph, "The manifestation or occurrence of a poltergeist is usually associated with a house or a physical object. Rather than a possession which deals with a person or animal being taken over by a demonic presence." I definitely wanted to learn more about it, so this content could be relevant in the "Paranormal" section or in its own separate section. Overall, I think you did a great job!