User:Bryanna Jones/User:Bryanna Jones/sandbox/Bluebunny12233 Peer Review

General info
Bryanna Jones
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Bryanna%20Jones/User%3ABryanna_Jones%2Fsandbox/Bluebunny12233_Peer_Review?veaction=edit&preload=Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org_peer_review
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists):

Evaluate the drafted changes
The sections state what they are about very well and the way that it is worded really impressed me. I can't find anything that I think should be improved. The lead of the sections clearly state what that section is about and reflects the important information. The leads do not only weigh on one part and I don't think there is anything missing. The sections are very well organized and they would still make sense if they were in a different order. The sections length is equal to the importance of it and there is nothing that is off topic. The article doesn't draw any conclusions or tries to convince the reader to accept one particular point of view. I believe you could guess the perspective and all of the words are neutral. The article does make claims of unnamed groups or people, it says "many people of Mexico" and "many public healthcare facilities". The article is neutral. The sources are reliable. Based on this review I plan on making 3 revisions to my sections. I am going to make sure I have all my sources where they need to be, make sure I don't have any unnamed groups or people, and make sure that my sections are neutral.