User:Aasaro4970/Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965/AEK7 Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing? -- Aasaro4970
 * Link to draft you're reviewing -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Aasaro4970/Immigration_and_Nationality_Act_of_1965?veaction=edit&preload=Template%3ADashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists) -- Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965

Evaluate the drafted changes
The lead for this article is really strong and effectively establishes the main points of the topic, providing relevant information on the article. It allows you to get a grasp of the article's main gist clearly and concisely with a sufficient amount of details. The structure of this article is logical and doesn't seem to need any changes from my observations, except for the fact that the lengths of some of the different sections are disproportionate, but you noted the ones that I did in your message at the top. Overall, I think you have done a great job so far with the drafting.

In the "Background" section, the third paragraph states how restrictive immigration laws were seen as an "embarrassment". This is important information to include, but I think it would be best to include more detail about this. It is cited, but it could use more clarity about who felt this way and what they might have had to say about it, or what their beliefs were in more detail. There were a few other areas within this section that I felt just needed more detail and additional information to clear up the reasoning for, and implications of, the different opinions people had about the legislation at the time before/around its enactment. It doesn't need to be elaborate, but it feels like it sort of assumes that the information is self-explanatory, which it might not be to some people. Nevertheless, the information included is relevant and helps support the informative purposes of the article.

I agree with you that the provisions section should be expanded on. This section was far more brief than many of the others and it would benefit the article to elaborate more on the provisions. Maybe some quotes from the law itself would be helpful to incorporate there, but also you could add in the intentions of adding the provisions and how significant they are today. This could also be expanded upon with a paragraph or section about violations of these provisions/the law in general--this could include examples of violations, statistics of how often violations of the law are reported, and potential legal consequences for violators.

The sources are varied and effectively support the purposes of the article. I didn't really notice any hints of bias within the article, especially considering the subject matter. It does not feel as though the article attempts to persuade readers, and the sources used were quite objective as well from what I observed. All of the links I clicked on were still working. I did notice, though, that a lot of the sources were either published or accessed quite some time ago. While this is okay, it might be beneficial to incorporate some modern sources to compensate for having numerous older ones.

Response to Peer Review
Thank you so much for looking at my draft! I will for sure update the background section and make sure that everything is cited correctly. Also, thank you for bringing up the provision section; I believe this should be the next thing I should edit because it is such a crucial part of the page. I will actually most likely take your suggestion by adding a quote or two from the actual bill as well. With the new updates I will make, I will also make sure to add more modern sources to ensure there is a variety of different sources on my Wikipedia page.

--Alexis A.