User:Alexdaviesmorris/Worker cooperative/ToharZamir Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Alexdaviesmorris


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alexdaviesmorris/Worker_cooperative?veaction=edit&preload=Template%3ADashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template


 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Worker cooperative

Evaluate the drafted changes
(Compose a detailed peer review here, considering each of the key aspects listed above if it is relevant. Consider the guiding questions, and check out the examples of what feedback looks like.)

I think the Internal Capital Accounts/Member Buy-Ins area had a pretty strong lead; the definition was clear and concise, and didn't get hung-up on over-explaining while still being properly and sufficiently cited. I like the global sweep, it provides some neutrality. The prose of this section also needs cleaning up, the sentences generally can be shortened. The concepts are clear, but brevity will help make the article more approachable. That being said, I see areas that can't be shortened and think that an appreciable area is still very well written as is. The Internal Capital Accounts/Member Buy-Ins section is well written.

the Committed Capital and State Financing areas similarly are rather concise and clear, but could benefit from grammatical checks. Especially consistency in whether to capitalize "government."

under the DPO section, I would be hesitant to use the word "socially," instead try "communally" (as social refers to socialization, community might be broader and fit more neatly here). Instead of "several" in the last sentence, it would be prudent to say "examples of firms..."

The peer financing section is easy to understand, and in my opinion ready for publish.

The article overall is neutral, well-cited and balanced–I would only suggest assessing the brevity and grammar (especially in the first half).