User:Alex K. Tran/Digital health/Mervitan Peer Review

Peer review
This is where you will complete your peer review exercise. Please use the following template to fill out your review.

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing? Alex K. Tran
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: User:Alex K. Tran/sandbox

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer?
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?

Lead evaluation
The edit seems to jump straight into the article, so I think it would be nice to create a lead section where you can introduce a lot of the topics that you are planning to talk about.

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic?
 * Is the content added up-to-date?
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?

Content evaluation
The content was very well-thought out and planned. However, I think you should try to organize all your information into different sections with relevant headings, which would made the plethora of information that you have a lot easier to follow.

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral?
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?

Tone and balance evaluation
Overall, the tone seemed very neutral. Cite more reasons why a Delegative Democracy may have failed and perhaps try to find more examples if possible. However, I understand it is a relatively new form of democracy.

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Are the sources current?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Sources and references evaluation
There was one line where you linked the whole sentence to a source. I am not sure if you quoted it, but try to just have the number at the end and paraphrase from sources to avoid direct quotation. Try to cite all sources at the end of the sentence to avoid having two sources back to back which can confuse readers because you have "Argentina" written twice, but cited to different sources. Have your number citation after your periods for all.

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?

Organization evaluation
Add a comma after "In 2002," as it is an introductory phrase. Otherwise, content is very well-written with few mistakes.