User:Carolinehardingggggg/Morrison–Grady Plan/Photoworldtravler Peer Review

General info
(Carolinehardingggggg)
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Carolinehardingggggg/Morrison%E2%80%93Grady_Plan?veaction=edit&preload=Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists):Morrison–Grady Plan

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.)

The Lead has been updated but has a few issues. One of the main issues is the lead length as it seems to be more of a large body or section of the article, not a quick summary for a lead. I would also try and change the tone of the added sections for the first paragraph as it does not flow well. The 2nd paragraph of the lead section is well written. I think just moving around some of the paragraphs to different sections and condensing the lead will make it flow much better.

The content added is relevant and well written. The content also is up to date and from a reliable source. The tone is neutral and does not seem to have any voice breaching the writing. The overall content and way it is presented is well done, and very clear. The only thing I would change to make the article more clear is how the sections are split, which could give more of chronological and topic separation in the article.

Sources are all from an academic author or resource so there is no doubt of their validity. The only issue is how they are cited, as one source is repeated twice in the references as "Friesel, Evyatar. "Toward the Partition of Palestine: The Goldmann Mission in Washington, August 1946." Nahum Goldmann: Statesman Without a State, ed. Mark A. Raider (Albany, forthcoming) (2009)." and "Friesel, Evyatar (2009). "Towards the Partition of Palestine: The Goldmann Mission in Washington". Modern Jewish History". These appear to be the same source just cited differently. Source 5 also appears to have an error as the end states " : More than one of  and   specified (help)".

The content itself is well written however I think more concise subsections should be created. In its current state its too dense, and needs to be separated. This is especially true for the lead. With some moving around of paragraphs it should be nearly ready to publish. I would also add that no major grammar issues appeared when reading the article, but I would go over it a few more times to ensure it is consistent in tense and that there are no minor grammatical issues.

Overall the article is well written and nearly done. Just moving around the paragraphs, creating subsections, and fixing the sources and grammar will lead to a publishable article. All in all I enjoyed reading it and it added much more context to the Morrison-Grady plan than the original wikipedia article and I look forward to reading the final product.