User:Bec1970/Effects of pornography on young people/Wikistudent100 Peer Review

General info
Bec1970
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:Bec1970/Effects of pornography on young people
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists):Effects of pornography on young people
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists):Effects of pornography on young people

Lead

 * Currently the lead has not been updated with new content.

Content

 * It appears that all content is relevant to the topic of pornography and pornography addiction. So far, the effects of pornography on young people specifically is only briefly mentioned, but perhaps as the article is further edited, it delve deeper into that topic.


 * The content does seem up-to-date; citing sources from the past 10 years.
 * There is certainly content missing, but that is to be expected because this is just the Sandbox. Specifically within each subheading, the information seems well rounded. I don't think there is any content which does not belong.
 * It does not appear that this article deals with one of wiki's equity gaps.

Tone and Balance

 * The article does seem neutral and non-biased, with claims stemming from sourced material.
 * I don't see any bias. The first paragraph even mentions how its a controversial topic, which has many perspectives.

Sources and References

 * "In relation to pornography, Braithwaite et al. completed a study to investigate the relationship between sexual risks over to time to porn viewing and script acquisition." I don't think I can see\ the source to this study.
 * Since looking through the three sources and cross examining it looks like the information is well sourced and has not been manipulated.
 * The sources are on topic and current (within the past 10 years, some within the past 2).
 * The references authors seem to be a diverse group of people, but I am unable to find much information on that.
 * This sandbox page only has three sources cited, and the topic seems to be something which has been widely researched, so I'm confident there are other good sources to reference in this article.
 * The links work!

Organization

 * The content in this sandbox is well organized and well written.
 * I have not spotted any spelling or grammar errors, but I'm not amazing at catching those.
 * It is broken up into well organized sub topics.

Images and Media

 * No images or media have been added so far.

Overall Impressions

 * From what I can see in the sandbox, the content looks relevant and informational, which is good.
 * Its strengths are its concise and to-the-point writing style. It can be improved by focusing more on porns effects on YOUNG people.