User:Ashleyjenkins2002/Straight ally/Fairyzizi Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Ashleyjenkins2002


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * Editing User:Ashleyjenkins2002/Straight ally - Wikipedia
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Straight ally - Wikipedia
 * Straight ally - Wikipedia

Evaluate the drafted changes
The Lead of the article isn't updated but I do not see a need to, it seems very concise.

In terms of content added, I am not exactly sure what has been added by the user because they have a paragraph from the article in their draft with 3 additional sentences. So, I am not sure if those sentences at the end is their addition, if so, it has not been added to the main article. ￼ So, I am going to continue the peer review with the basis that those three are the addition to the article. The content added is relevant to the article and it is up to date. I would suggest moving the organizations section of the article either after "Stages of Allyship" or "Challenges Raised," because it would make the article easier to read and understand. By having the organizations at the end, the reader can have better examples of what they just read.

The tone and balance is neutral, except fort the last sentence. I would remove "in hopes of," it does not sound neutral and that you are a supporter of that organization.

The source needs to be added to the main article. The link does work in the draft and is reputable.

In terms of conciseness, I would suggest making those three sentences more cohesive. They are a slightly difficult to read compared to what is written before it, it slows down the section.