User:Angb2015/Autism therapies/Cfarmer4 Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Angb2015


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Angb2015/Autism_therapies?veaction=edit&preload=Template%3ADashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Autism therapies

Evaluate the drafted changes

 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer? The lead has been updated in the sandbox with a sentence describing Autism and when it has been noticed. There is not a citation for the claim that most kids can be diagnosed by 18 months.
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? The lead does introduce the article's topic by describing what Autism is and how people have to look for treatments since there is not a cure. This can be used as a segway into the different treatment options.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? The original lead is quite detailed and could be condensed. They do mention the other sections within the lead.

I noticed that the tone was not always neutral. Words like best and great were used when describing forms of Autism therapies.

Content

 * Is the content added relevant to the topic? The content is relevant and discusses treatment options.
 * Is the content added up-to-date? The content is up to date.

Tone and Balance

 * Is the content added neutral? The tone is not alway neutral. Steer way from saying one treatment option is the best. You could say it has had success or has been a successful treatment option for Autism. The use of the word, "cure", can also be offensive. Many people with autism do not think tha they need a cure and this is referenced in the article.

Sources and References

 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? No sources were cited within the sandbox draft. References are listed but there are no in-text citation after claims were made.
 * Are the sources current? The sources are current. They have been posted within the past five years.

Overall, I think you have done a good job of finding information to add. I would be careful with tone and make sure to add citations after you make a claim. I think you could edit the original lead more to make it more concise.

{Hi! While I tried to make sure to maintain a neutral tone throughout my draft, I am open to making changes so that it does not suggest otherwise to the readers! Thank you!}