User:Annabelle718/Open Washing/Bluebeey Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

(Annabelle718)


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:Annabelle718/Open Washing


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

Evaluate the drafted changes
Lead

For the lead sentence, I would switch the order of Open Washing and Openwashing. In the parentheses, you explain that openwashing is a compound word, but the word that preceded the explanation is not a compound word. I would also add the citation for openwashing being derived from greenwashing.

The wording could be a little more concise. I would recommend rephrasing to something like: "Open Washing describes the practice of presenting something...". I would also recommend adding another sentence to expand on the summary. For example, you could add a sentence about the types of entities that tend to participate in open washing. Is it private individuals, corporations, governments open washing? And what is the "something" that gets open washed? Data or something else?

Usage

I would recommend renaming this section to "Usage of the term" or "History of the term". Usage alone might imply usage of openwashing itself.

This section could use some expansion. Who is Berlin Partner? What was the purpose of their marketing campaign? What where the terms of use that violated open principles, and what principles are those?

Consider adding some more background information about the Open Exchange for Social Change Unconference. What's the purpose of the conference, and how are they related to the concept of Openwashing/openess/open data? I think the sentence could also be slightly reworded. You could change "openwashing was discussed at the Open Exchange for Social Change Unconference in Madrid..." to something like "In 2016, Scholars discussed openwashing at the Open Exchange for Social Change..." or "Open washing was a topic of discussion at the 2016 Open Exchange..."

There's a slight grammatical error here. "familiarized international... to the term" should be "familiarized international... with the term"

Who is Evgeny Morozov? What are his credentials (why does his opinion on the term matter)? I would also add the date/year when he criticised the term.

I would add a comma in-between "openwashing can be used in many contexts and "helps us question the authenticity of open initiatives", and "but does not indicate the barrier to openness itself".

Openwashing by Governments

Who is Ana Brandusescu, and what is the World Wide Web Foundation? Why does it matter what they say about open washing?

"This could mean excluding information about how governments decide who contracts are awarded to or how money was spent after allocation." This sentence could use a comma to break it up. I would reword it to something like "This could mean excluding information about how governments decide who gets awarded a contract, and how money is spent afterwards."

Who is Maximilian Heimstädt? A scholar? A researcher?

Do you have any concrete examples of governments participating in openwashing? Something like the Berlin Partner marketing campaign?

Openwashing by Private Industry

I think this section could be renamed to something like Openwashing in Private Companies. "Industry" might imply that you are talking about entire industries, rather than a few companies.

The section could also use some more expansion if possible. Do you have any other examples of private companies engaging in openwashing?

VMWare and Microsoft

Who are the Red Hat Inc.? What are their credentials and why does it matter that they accused Microsoft and VMWare of open washing?

It looks like the issue of VMWare charging fees per virtual machine was separate from the issue of Microsoft encouraging consumers to exclusively use MS products. "Red Hat claimed that VMWare and Microsoft were marketing their cloud products as open source, despite charging fees per machine using the cloud products" - this sentence suggests that both MS and VMWare were charging per machine. It should be changed to clarify that there were two issues.

Regulation

There's a slight grammatical error here. "ban of openwashing" should be "ban on openwashing". Is there any regulation on Open Washing in other countries? Perhaps European countries?

"Other forms of ‘washing’ have caused legal action to be taken". This sentence is slightly clunky. I would recommend rewording to something like "Other forms of "washing" have prompted legal action against companies.

"In 2022, international fast fashion company H&M was sued by Chelsea Commodore for greenwashing, with ongoing reviews of other fast fashion companies by domestic competition bureaus potentially causing further legal action" I would recommend splitting this sentence into two for easier reading. A fullstop after "Chelsea Commodore for greenwashing", and "Ongoing reviews of other fast fashion..." as a separate sentence.

Final Comments

I think your article is good. It could use some expansion and elaboration in a few areas, as well as a few changes to sentence structure and fixing grammatical errors. However, you've provided a very good overview of the concept of openwashing. I would recommend rereading the article from the perspective of someone who knows nothing about open washing/open data and isn't familiar with any of the scholars or organisations related to the topic. This could help you to see where you can elaborate more or provide more information for the reader. Overall, great job!