User:Camel Intellectual/Uganda Scheme/Discreetalmonds Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Camel Intellectual


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Camel%20Intellectual/Uganda_Scheme?preload=Template%3ADashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template


 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Uganda Scheme

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer? Yes, the lead has been updated to reflect new content added. The new content expands on the information already there.
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Yes, the first sentence describes the topic very well and concisely.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? The lead does not include a brief description of the other sections, which would be a helpful addition once you add the other sections.

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic? Yes, it is good information that adds context to the original piece.
 * Is the content added up-to-date? Yes, you have a few sources from 2016-2018. If you could find something more recent (if there is anything0 it may be helpful.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? I am assuming you are not done with all the sections, but there are definitely more sections that could be added, or even subsections of the history section where you go into more depth about what lead up to it, the movement it was a part of, etc. You could expand on white settler opposition, as this sounded interesting and piqued interest.

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral? Yes, the content added appears to be neutral and factual.

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? For the most part, you did a very good job citing your sources, although a few sentences stood out as needing a citation.
 * "The vote passed 295 to 177 with a defeated majority, mostly Eastern European delegates." It would be helpful to have a citation right after this as it is very specific information.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? As you add more information, you will need some more sources, because as of now, in the first paragraph you only have 4 it appears, while in the original article there are much more for the same paragraph. It is most important that you have quality sources over the amount, but think it could be helpful to expand on your sources.
 * Check a few links. Do they work? Yes, all the links work.

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? Yes, the content is well-written, understandable, interesting, and full of information. Further paragraphs will hopefully be written the same way because it is very good!
 * Editedfileugandaplan.pngDoes the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors? The images attached are the edited version of your article.
 * Ugandaplanpeerreview.pngIs the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? So far you only have one section, but as I suggested earlier it may be helpful to create more sections and sub-sections.

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete? The article is more complete in the sense that the history paragraph is much more detailed, but I think you should find more sources and add more sections.
 * What are the strengths of the content added? It is very specific and well written and adds a lot of detail.