User:AddieGrace/Neurodiversity/Aebner01 Peer Review

General info
AddieGrace
 * Whose work are you reviewing?
 * Link to draft you're reviewing:
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists):Neurodiversity

Evaluate the drafted changes
The edits made within the users draft are lacking reliability. For instance, the statements implemented within the article are coming from a non peer reviewed source. This allows for bias to be brought into the article which is not what wiki wants. I would suggest going in and finding other sources in which provides the same evidence to support the claims made. The article itself has some major issues with reliability. The page itself has a warning for the article possessing unsourced predictions, speculative material, and events that may or may not have occurred due to lack of evidence. Due to this reason alone, before adding any new material into the article I would suggest going in and cleaning up what is already incorporated in. I would start off section by section and check all of the sources for reliability purposes. I would then go in and take out any information in which seems to be biased or predictive in nature. There are already several subtopics that capture neurodiversity as a whole, so I would not focus much on added any new sections. If there was a new section added, I would recommend adding one in which touches on the addition made by AddieGrace in her sandbox pertaining to education for neurotypicals to understand neurodiversity. She could go into detail over how a neurodivergent thinks and displays emotions, and how to conceptualize this to educate neurotypicals on in order to understand their peers better. Overall, there is a lot of good information within the article. The focus needs to be on cleaning it up and ensuring that there is no bias or false information.