User:Ckirk9/The National Federation of the Blind v. Target/Kcobb123 Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

(Ckirk9)


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:Ckirk9/The National Federation of the Blind v. Target
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)

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.)

Lead: The lead is concise, provides description of topic, and to date because the topic is completed.

Content: The content is relevant and covers the topic. There could be more information added about the lawsuit. The article even talks about what happened after the case was finished up until 2016. The article discusses disability history and rights.Tone and Balance: The information is neutral, mainly states facts, and doesn't sway my opinion on the topic.

Sources and References: The reference link works and seem reliable. I would like to see at least one more source like the court case. The content reflects the source. Also, the article needs more citations so the content isn't considered copyright or plagiarism. Also, there needs to be a source for the information about target 2016 because the source provide is published in 2012 and doesn't talk about that information.

Organization: The article is well-written, clear, and broken up in a way that makes the article easy to read. I didn't see any grammar errors.

Images and Media: article doesn't contain images or media.