User:Anonymousardvark/Social media and identity/SpaceWax Peer Review

General info
Adam12202, Anonymousardvark, Icarlee3338
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:Anonymousardvark/Social media and identity:
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists):Social media and identity

Lead

 * There have been no changes to the lead.

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic?
 * Yes
 * Is the content added up-to-date?
 * Yes
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * There needs to be an overview of the topic.

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Tone is good, however, I wonder if there are positive effects of social media on identity that are being missed.

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * A source needs to be added to the claim in the Audience section "How the audience reacts to a video or post will lead to people changing their persona to match what the audience wants."
 * Does the content accurately reflect what the cited sources say? (You'll need to refer to the sources to check this.)
 * Yes.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Yes.
 * Are the sources current?
 * Yes.
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * Yes.
 * Are there better sources available, such as peer-reviewed articles in place of news coverage or random websites? (You may need to do some digging to answer this.)
 * The large majority of sources are peer-reviewed articles.
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * Yes.

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * The section Young Adults needs to be cleaned up. The writing is choppy and has no flow from point to point, condensing it down could help with this.
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * None that I have noticed.
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * The organization is good of the overall article is good, but the organization within the sections themselves is a little messy.

Overall
The article is not very cohesive and needs better connection through the sections. More information about how exactly social media affects identity needs to be added. There also needs to be more edits made to preexisting article content on top of synthesis of material. There is better organization in this draft than the original article and the expansions to it have been good so far. There just needs to be some clean up and addition of sources.