User:Aleighob2/sandbox

Source and Summary Types of abuse and neglect

Child abuse and neglect refers to any behaviour by parents, caregivers, other adults or older adolescents that is outside the norms of conduct and entails a substantial risk of causing physical or emotional harm to a child or young person. Such behaviours may be intentional or unintentional and can include acts of omission (i.e., neglect) and commission (i.e., abuse) (Bromfield, 2005; Cristofel et al., 1992; Gilbert et al., 2009). The five main subtypes of child abuse and neglect are physical abuse, emotional maltreatment, neglect, sexual abuse, and witnessing family violence. https://aifs.gov.au/cfca/publications/effects-child-abuse-and-neglect-children-and-adolescents

Paraphrase: There are many actions you might not believe are considered child abuse. The two most common types of child abuse are neglect, and abuse. Neglect is when you do not provide a child with the minimum requirements they need to live. These requirements are providing food, heat, shelter, clothing, etc. for a child. Abuse and neglect of a child could be committed by people other than the parents, and could include family members, caregivers, or just someone in the community. Anyone can mistreat a child, and the major signs to watch out for would be how the child is dressed, if they look like they have been feed properly, if they look dirty, or if they seem like they want to get away from the person they are with. Physical abuse, emotional maltreatment, neglect, sexual abuse, and witnessing violence within a family are all the types of abuse that can harm a child. If you suspect child maltreatment, abuse, or neglect do not intervein with the perpetrator. Instead, you should report it immediately to the police.

Peer review (redone) Logan Weiss
content- The content in the paraphrase is well phrased; it does not seem to repeat too many of the original words from the source used. Neglect and abuse are repeats of the original source, but I feel like this is okay because they are both the main focus of the topic.

organization- The organization and flow makes sense, I did not find myself getting lost or confused.

tone- The tone of the paraphrase matches the tone of the article. It fits well with the tone expected from Wikipedia editors.

sources- The source is still seemingly very reliable. The website is reputable and the author could be considered an expert in the field.

Wenqi's Feedback
Your additions seem repetitive with the section "definition" and "types". You are not supposed to provide the information that already exists in the Wikipedia article. In other words, I am afraid you need to redo your additions: find other sources and recompose your paraphrase.

Peer Review
LoganW501 (talk) 19:14, 22 February 2019 (UTC)


 * 1) content- The paraphrasing is of similar length and still seems to be comprehensive. I do think that this source will be relevant for the article. I think that the paragraph might be closely related to ones already stated in the article; it might be helpful to add more information.
 * 2) organization- I think that the addition is organized in a comprehensible, easy to understand way. The only thing I would recommend doing would be to find a different word for maltreatment since it was already used in the main source. Also in the fourth sentence it says, "that child is because abused or neglected". Might be a grammatical error but I am not sure!
 * 3) tone- The tone is exactly what I am used to when reading a wikipedia article, good job!
 * 4) sources- the source is a dot gov which I find to be generally more reliable.