User:BriannaJohnston/sandbox/Jasneet/peer-review

Peer-review {| class="wikitable" Complete your peer review exercise below, providing as much constructive criticism as possible. The more detailed suggestions you provide, the more useful it will be to your classmate. Make sure you consider each of the following aspects:
 * Peer review

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer?
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic?
 * Is the content added up-to-date?
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral?
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Does the content accurately reflect what the cited sources say? (You'll need to refer to the sources to check this.)
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Are the sources current?
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * 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.)
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?

Images and Media
Guiding questions: If your peer added images or media


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?

For New Articles Only
If the draft you're reviewing is for a new article, consider the following in addition to the above.


 * Does the article meet Wikipedia's Notability requirements - i.e. Is the article supported by 2-3 reliable secondary sources independent of the subject?
 * How exhaustive is the list of sources? Does it accurately represent all available literature on the subject?
 * Does the article follow the patterns of other similar articles - i.e. contain any necessary infoboxes, section headings, and any other features contained within similar articles?
 * Does the article link to other articles so it is more discoverable?

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete?
 * What are the strengths of the content added?
 * How can the content added be improved?

Examples of good feedback
A good article evaluation can take a number of forms. The most essential things are to clearly identify the biggest shortcomings, and provide specific guidance on how the article can be improved.


 * Peer review of "Homemaking"
 * Peer review of this article about a famous painting
 * }

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

(provide username) Eren7013


 * Link to draft you're reviewing: User:Eren7013/Homeless women in the united states
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists): Homeless women in the United States
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists): Homeless women in the United States

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.)

Template documentation[ view] [edit] [history] [purge]

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? no

Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics? yes

Tone and Balance

Guiding questions:

Is the content added neutral? yes, there was no essay language

Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? no

Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? no

Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? no

Sources and References

Guiding questions:

Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? yes, but add the citations links by clicking insert then cite

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.) you used peer reviewed

Check a few links. Do they work?- include the links

Organization

Guiding questions:

Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? yes, it is easy to read. Maybe add the definition of case management or what exactly is case management before you start talking about it.

Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors? no errors

Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? yes. Think about adding a header that says federal programs like other sections have shown before they start talking about something new. Here's my idea below.

Services and Programs for Homeless Women and Families (jasneet)[edit]
(add what is case management here''') Case management incorporation plays an important part in helping women maintain residential stability (Bassuk, 2016; Krahn, 2018; Andermann, 2021). Case management has been noted to reduce the length a family stayed in a shelter by an average of 10 days compared to families that did not receive case management, indicating that the services that case management provides help families (Bassuk, 2006). Oftentimes, there is a spectrum of case management incorporation, ranging from highly informed supportive care or helping clients find housing resources and filling out paperwork. However, the main benefits of case management were maximized when caseworkers were able to provide feasible housing resources as well as support, increasing residential stabilization for families (Krahn, 2018).'''

'''While many homeless women and their families wait for housing, they are forced to live in overcrowded and poorly maintained emergency shelters (Murphy, 2009). Emergency shelters offer little respite to homeless individuals and families since they are fraught with cases of harassment, lack of meals, extortion, and assault due to the lack of regulations (Murphy, 2009). Generally, overcrowded and poorly managed emergency shelters can serve to further traumatize homeless families because both men and women share the same spaces  (Andermann, 2021; Oudshoorn, 2018).'''

Federal Programs

'''Federal programs and grants distributed by the United States Department of Housing [HUD] generally seem to focus on increasing access to short-term housing. For example, Section 8 certificates are housing vouchers that provide subsidized housing for low-income families. Once the appropriate paperwork is completed, public housing agencies rate the family's eligibility, and they are then placed on a long waiting list. The household only needs to fraction 30% of their income for rent while the government pays for the rest (Shinn, 2005). Unhoused individuals who are offered subsidized housing under section 8 continuously need to satisfy requirements so they can maintain their residential stability (Shinn, 2005). A noticeable issue with Section 8 housing is that it does not offer immediate solutions to persons at risk of homelessness, experiencing hidden homelessness (as many women and families are), or even to those who are unhoused. Instead, people who need help are forced to wait and expected to endure until the chance of obtaining housing arises. Throughout this waiting period, families are still expected to meet the low-income requirements specified by Section 8 in order to qualify (Teater, 2010). Furthermore, housing units under Section 8 are usually located in extremely poor neighborhoods, in housing units reflective of their poor environment (Teater, 2010). Section 8 also provides initial exposure to the housing market which brings homeless persons and families a step forward to renting an apartment or even a house (Shinn, 2005).'''

Overall impressions

Guiding questions:

Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete? Yes, you brought new information that is specifically towards homeless

What are the strengths of the content added? It is neutral and informative without any underlying tone or stigma against homeless women

How can the content added be improved? The same comments I made above which are including the citation links, adding what case management is, and breaking the section up.

Usage
This template is used as part of Wiki Ed.