![]() | 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: LeadGuiding questions:
ContentGuiding questions:
Tone and BalanceGuiding questions:
Sources and ReferencesGuiding questions:
OrganizationGuiding questions:
Images and MediaGuiding questions: If your peer added images or media
For New Articles OnlyIf the draft you're reviewing is for a new article, consider the following in addition to the above.
Overall impressionsGuiding questions:
Examples of good feedbackA 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.
Additional Resources |
Plantbella
Lead
The introductory sentence clearly describes this article's topic.
Content
The Historical Context and Revisions sections are well-written and relevant to the topic. Keeping in mind that this is a work-in-progress, more content could be added for the Reception section.
Tone and Balance
The tone overall is pretty good. The content added feels unbiased and factual, tone-wise.
Sources and References
The sentence "It was revised and expanded in 2015." seems to need a source to back it up, as the reference linked is a source from 2008. Moreover, looking at the original article, the source that it links from the WAS says the Declaration was revised in 2014, not 2015. Reference #2 is also missing a URL, if that is something which is available. You did a good job at linking other Wikipedia articles into your paragraphs so that readers are able to get the full context.
Organization
The new content is appropriately divided into different sections, which are also well-ordered.
Images and Media
The images added are currently not captioned, and also do not seem to be very relevant to the article's topic.
Overall Impressions
I really like the way that you have organized your content - it makes everything much clearer and flow better. I would focus on checking the sources used for your content, as well as adding more information in order to build up the article. Also, the images should either be changed to be more relevant to the topic at hand, and/or captioned to state the relevance.
![]() | 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: LeadGuiding questions:
ContentGuiding questions:
Tone and BalanceGuiding questions:
Sources and ReferencesGuiding questions:
OrganizationGuiding questions:
Images and MediaGuiding questions: If your peer added images or media
For New Articles OnlyIf the draft you're reviewing is for a new article, consider the following in addition to the above.
Overall impressionsGuiding questions:
Examples of good feedbackA 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.
Additional Resources |
Plantbella
Lead
The introductory sentence clearly describes this article's topic.
Content
The Historical Context and Revisions sections are well-written and relevant to the topic. Keeping in mind that this is a work-in-progress, more content could be added for the Reception section.
Tone and Balance
The tone overall is pretty good. The content added feels unbiased and factual, tone-wise.
Sources and References
The sentence "It was revised and expanded in 2015." seems to need a source to back it up, as the reference linked is a source from 2008. Moreover, looking at the original article, the source that it links from the WAS says the Declaration was revised in 2014, not 2015. Reference #2 is also missing a URL, if that is something which is available. You did a good job at linking other Wikipedia articles into your paragraphs so that readers are able to get the full context.
Organization
The new content is appropriately divided into different sections, which are also well-ordered.
Images and Media
The images added are currently not captioned, and also do not seem to be very relevant to the article's topic.
Overall Impressions
I really like the way that you have organized your content - it makes everything much clearer and flow better. I would focus on checking the sources used for your content, as well as adding more information in order to build up the article. Also, the images should either be changed to be more relevant to the topic at hand, and/or captioned to state the relevance.