Misplaced Pages

User:請緊握扶手/Lotus seed bun/Lindsay Kim Peer Review

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< User:請緊握扶手
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 Misplaced Pages'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 Misplaced Pages'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 Misplaced Pages'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.

Additional Resources

Check out the Editing Misplaced Pages PDF for general editing tips and suggestions.

General info

Whose work are you reviewing?

請緊握扶手

Link to draft you're reviewing
https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Lotus_seed_bun&oldid=1251958348
Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
Lotus seed bun

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.)

The article provides a brief but solid introduction to the Lotus Seed Bun, but several areas require improvement. Though the lead is very concise, it could be expanded to include a more straightforward summary of the article’s sections and an explanation of the significance of the lotus seed bun. I suggest adding specific examples or regions, such as detailed descriptions of particular towns or places, such as thorough descriptions of specific towns or cities where lotus seed bun is most commonly found, and which place is best-known for lotus seed bun to enhance the article. Additionally, I noticed that the focus is very brief and on Asian perspectives. I believe that providing more diverse perspectives, such as perspectives on what Lotus is, where it originated, how different cultures use Lotus and more depth in the overall article, would provide a more balanced view. Also, more sections could be added on food heritage, best recipes, and how other countries view & eat them.

Although some sections are missing more details, the content is neutral, and the structure is clear and easy to follow. The article provides a good intro point but still needs further refinement.