User:Adr2018/United Farm Workers/OutskirtAZ Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Adr2018


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Adr2018/United_Farm_Workers?veaction=edit&preload=Template%3ADashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * United Farm Workers

Lead
The lead has not been updated to reflect the new content added, but this is simply because the content has not been added to the article itself. As the article stands, the lead is written quite well as it is concise and appropriately introduces the topic with a relevant opening sentence; however, it does not outline the sections, but due to the article’s current organization doing such would lead to an overly descriptive lead section.

Content
The added content is relevant to the topic and adds an entirely new section on the services offered by United Farm Workers to their union members, including those at the Terronez Clinic. The student also added more information on events involving the UFW in the 1970s as well as another section on their support from Robert Kennedy. All of this information came from sources published during the last 20 years, which is relatively up to date especially considering the more historical nature of the UFW. Because the article deals with Hispanic and Asian American issues, it does fill an equity gap and the additional information helps further the article’s coverage on these issues.

Tone and Balance
All additions to the article are neutral and unbiased without any sort of attempt to lead the reader into supporting a certain viewpoint. No viewpoints are overrepresented or underrepresented.

Sources and References
The student provided reliable sources for all new content which accurately represented the information put forth in the article. All sources provided are current and thorough as they center around the UFW itself. Additionally, many of the authors of these pieces are Latinx themselves and therefore reflect marginalized viewpoints. There is a wealth of literature on United Farm Workers which means there may be better sources, but the current sources are sufficient and from functional links. The only error in terms of sources is that sources 1 and 2 are the same citation, but this is an easy fix and does not impede the readability or reliability of the new information.

Organization
Overall, the organization of the new content is very good. The content is generally well written and easy to read, free of any (unrevised) grammatical and spelling errors. Although the new additions are not overly extensive, they are nonetheless organized into logically formulated sections.

Overall Impressions
Even without the additions, the article is quite complete, but the additions to elaborate on the standing information and are of good quality. My sole suggestion would be to further expand upon the services offered by UFW. However, the additions as they stand do not need any sort of major revising.