 | 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 |
- Whose work are you reviewing?
Sherifa Ahmed
- Link to draft you're reviewing
- User:SherifaOsman/Ahmad Sah l Bahmani Mausoleum
- Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
Lead
The lead is clear to understand and reflects the focus of the article. I think it would be useful to give a brief insight into the elements of the monument that the article explores.
Content
The content is interesting and captures the attention of the reader. The discussion of the architecture and history of the monument are both complemented by the discussion of language, poetry, political history and religion. There is no specific address of equity gaps, but the dynamic approach to the monument beyond its material appearance makes the article interesting.
Tone and Balance
The author’s voice is evident in the article, as are their strong writing skills. There is no apparent bias, but there is also no impartiality
Sources and References
There are references made to scholars in the article, but with the absence of links or citations it is hard to determine the quality and diversity of the sources used.
Organization
There are many long, and occasionally run-on, sentences in this article which negatively affect its value as an easy to read resource. I think it is important for Wikipedia articles to be concise and easy to follow in order to keep the reader hooked, and enable them to find the necessary information easily. There are some minor grammatical mistakes and/or missing words. I think it would be useful to read the article again and ensure sentence structure is easier, and that some informalities are removed.
Images and Media
There are no images above. I think images would be a great visual addition to the writer’s well written descriptions of the monument.
Overall Impressions
This was an interesting read. Not only is the writer skilled, they are also able to explore the monument in many ways. We read about the monument’s material description, but also about its cultural and historical significance, and delve deeper into a discussion on language and the poetry found in the monument. When made more concise to suit the format of Wikipedia, this article will surely be well received by readers.
| 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 |
- Whose work are you reviewing?
Sherifa Ahmed
- Link to draft you're reviewing
- User:SherifaOsman/Ahmad Sah l Bahmani Mausoleum
- Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
Lead
The lead is clear to understand and reflects the focus of the article. I think it would be useful to give a brief insight into the elements of the monument that the article explores.
Content
The content is interesting and captures the attention of the reader. The discussion of the architecture and history of the monument are both complemented by the discussion of language, poetry, political history and religion. There is no specific address of equity gaps, but the dynamic approach to the monument beyond its material appearance makes the article interesting.
Tone and Balance
The author’s voice is evident in the article, as are their strong writing skills. There is no apparent bias, but there is also no impartiality
Sources and References
There are references made to scholars in the article, but with the absence of links or citations it is hard to determine the quality and diversity of the sources used.
Organization
There are many long, and occasionally run-on, sentences in this article which negatively affect its value as an easy to read resource. I think it is important for Wikipedia articles to be concise and easy to follow in order to keep the reader hooked, and enable them to find the necessary information easily. There are some minor grammatical mistakes and/or missing words. I think it would be useful to read the article again and ensure sentence structure is easier, and that some informalities are removed.
Images and Media
There are no images above. I think images would be a great visual addition to the writer’s well written descriptions of the monument.
Overall Impressions
This was an interesting read. Not only is the writer skilled, they are also able to explore the monument in many ways. We read about the monument’s material description, but also about its cultural and historical significance, and delve deeper into a discussion on language and the poetry found in the monument. When made more concise to suit the format of Wikipedia, this article will surely be well received by readers.