User talk:Kirke1221
| This user is a student editor in Western_Washington_University/History_of_Ancient_Greece_(Fall_Quarter) . |
Welcome!
Hello, Kirke1221, and welcome to Wikipedia! My name is Ian and I work with Wiki Education; I help support students who are editing as part of a class assignment.
I hope you enjoy editing here. If you haven't already done so, please check out the student training library, which introduces you to editing and Wikipedia's core principles. You may also want to check out the Teahouse, a community of Wikipedia editors dedicated to helping new users. Below are some resources to help you get started editing.
Handouts
|
|---|
|
Additional Resources
|
|
If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 17:00, 11 October 2021 (UTC)
Peer Review
Hey! I've completed your peer review! Not sure how to access peer reviews, so I just copied it below just in case :)--Matisse123 (talk) 08:09, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
Peer review Lead[edit] Guiding questions:
Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer? The lead does not seem to need to to be updated as not much new information has been added. Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Yes. Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? Mostly, yes. Perhaps you could mention evidence of her cult can be found in many places through the Mediterranean. Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? "Her son was Sosipolis, who was worshiped at Elis." Her son is mentioned in the sidebar under 'Children' and in the Olympia tab. Perhaps restating Sosipolis in this section could be helpful, as he is not really mentioned in detail after the Lead. [1] Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? The lead is super concise. Content[edit] Guiding questions:
Is the content added relevant to the topic? Not a ton of new content was added besides the references. Is the content added up-to-date? I think so. Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? No. Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics? Sort of, but not outrightly. Eileithyia was a goddess of childbirth and therefore was probably important to women, who are usually a underrepresented population in Greek History. Maybe Tone and Balance[edit] Guiding questions:
Is the content added neutral? Yes. Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? No. Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? No. Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? No. Sources and References[edit] Guiding questions:
Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Yes. Does the content accurately reflect what the cited sources say? (You'll need to refer to the sources to check this.) Yes. Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? Yes. Are the sources current? Many of the sources are older. Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible? No. 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.) The sources used appear to be credible. Check a few links. Do they work? Not all the references have links, perhaps those could be added so readers have direct access to the sources? The ones that are linked do work though. Organization[edit] Guiding questions:
Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? Yes. Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors? No. Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Yes. Overall impressions[edit] Guiding questions:
Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete? Yes. What are the strengths of the content added? The amount of references added is pretty good. 4 new references were added. It seems some grammar was corrected as well. How can the content added be improved? Perhaps add a section about Eileithyia in popular culture? This particular article is not missing a ton of info. Perhaps try and find more pictures to add? There is only picture in the entire article. An idea would be to add a picture of The Beauty of Durrës? Overall good job!