User:Awesomeaxolotl/Pearl Sherrod/PeachPickles Peer Review

General info
User:Awesomeaxolotl/Pearl Sherrod
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing:User:Awesomeaxolotl/Pearl Sherrod
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists):

Evaluate the drafted changes
(Compose a detailed peer review here, considering each of the key aspects listed above if it is relevant. Consider the guiding questions, and check out the examples of what feedback looks like.)

Lead: The lead directly describes the article's content and focus. It has a strong introductory sentence but could be added onto or expanded slightly to become a small paragraph. For example, it could include a brief description of the article's different sections.

Content: The content appears to be up to date and relevant to the lead section. It is detailed and covers various aspects of her life from activism, work, and personal life. It seems that research on Sherrod is limited, but the group did a good job at providing detailed and descriptive text. Furthermore, it focuses on an under-represented group/topic by highlight interracial solidarity between African American and Asian people. If possible, it could be beneficial to add more to the impact of such an alliance between Sherrod and her husband Takasahi in later or more recent years. It would especially be interesting if there was information on how the TDOO or PPWA more broadly impacted women's historical movements.

Tone and Balance: I think the beginning section focusing on Sherrod's work at the PPWA is written in slightly a persuasive tone. It could help to add a citation to validate the claims that Sherrod exaggerated at the PPWA and aimed to bolster her credibility. Alternatively, it could be rephrased to be more more neutral.

Sources and References: There does not appear to be a references list which should be added. There are a lot of fact-based statements that could use a footnote reference. Additionally, a range of sources listed could help meet the notability requirements.

Organization: The content is clear, concise, and easy to understand. I had no previous knowledge of this subject and understood the entire article. The organization and flow of the sections is also chronological and has a natural flow.

Images: N/A

Overall: Overall, I would add the lead section to briefly describe the main sections and points of the article. Otherwise, I think the length and organization of the sections is coherent and clear. I think a particular strength is the use of the quote to illustrate Sherrod's involvement at the PPWA.