User:Anonymous - JJH 8/Agenda-setting theory/Ljc22b Peer Review

General info
JJH 8, Airalia, Amandalonsoo, SpaceWax
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing:User:Anonymous - JJH 8/Agenda-setting theory
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists):Agenda-setting theory

Evaluate the drafted changes
Lead - The lead that already exists within the current version of the article seems to be pretty good overall, as I do not see an updated version within the sandbox draft of the article. Based on the article as it stands I do think more could be added to the lead but honestly if you guys don't tweak it at all I don't think there would be any reason to lose sleep. The main addition that could be made to the lead is just in the very beginning explaining that agenda setting is a media theory, cause as it stands the article just opens with "Agenda setting describes the "ability (of the news media)"

Content - I think one of the smartest things that you guys did was further elaborate on what the three models of agenda setting are. It seems almost like an oversight on behalf of the original authors to have note included that. While I do like the simplicity with which you describe these is good, I think a little more description overall would help. Like I walk away from the sandbox still not knowing what exactly a priorities model is. Also I like how for the application section you include a number of different international examples. Really paints a broad picture of the situation at large.

Tone and Balance - No complaints here. Did not really witness anything that seems to be trying to lean towards one side or the other. Even when you're bringing up different political parties, it feels matter of fact as opposed to trying to paint any political party in a certain kind of way. Good job in this capacity

Organization - As I don't quite know how it is planned for all of this to be added into the article (I mean there are some places where it is fairly apparent like in the places that you have updated I presume you're gonna put those where they already were) but I will say if you plan on making the "Comparison of agenda-setting with policy agenda-building" section the closer I think is a better option then the social media closer that the normal page has. I know that wikipedia articles don't technically have closing sections as we know them but you know what I mean. Also another thing to note about the main article is that the sub-section known as "Additional factors to be considered in agenda-setting research" only being comprised of a link to another wikipedia article is a little lazy. I definitely think y'all could do better than the og writers.

Overall it seems like you guys are on the right course. I think the additions you guys added all seem to enhance what already exists. I will say given that the article itself is already very full, a lot of the changes you guys are making are more so additions than broad sweeping changes, which in this case I think is a good thing since the bones of the original article are very sturdy.