User:Coccinellee/Azza Ghanmi/Ellefay Peer Review

General info
Coccinellee
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:Coccinellee/Azza Ghanmi
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)

Evaluate the drafted changes
Lead:

- The topic sentence is great! It tells me who Ghanmi is and what she is known for.

- The writing in the lead is clear and understandable. It sounds professional and academic without being confusing.

- The lead clearly introduces Ghanmi's achievements and involvement in organizations

- The lead's end sentence wraps up the article's topic really well. It is clear and engaging.

- There was no description of the article's major sections, which I realize my group did not do either. Maybe add it if it doesn't seem too forced.

- The lead includes information that is in the article such as AFTD and AFARD mentioned in the organizations part.

Content:

Early Life and Feminism:

- The Early Life section could use some more information about where she was born, who her parents were, and what education she received. If that was not available, that is totally understandable, so maybe change the title of this section to Feminism instead of Early Life.

- That aside, this paragraph is straightforward and shows what Ghanmi was focused on in her advocacy.

- I think that some of her participation could be expanded on, as it kind of comes across that she was involved, but what did she do? It is said that she discussed issues regarding sexuality, so what was her stance on it? What did she believe or have to say about that?

- The use of Wikipedia references in this article is well done. I like that if I wasn't aware of the organizations, there are links where I can find and read about them.

- This content is definitely relevant to the topic, which is Ghanmi's work and involvement.

- This content is neutral and simply presents a picture of what Ghanmi was doing.

Nissa Magazine:

- The inclusion of the Personal Status Code in this description is nice. I didn't know what it was, so having it linked was helpful to understanding the context of the journal dispute.

- Again, this portion could be more focused on the topic at hand: Azza Ghanmi herself. More could be said about what her mission was, her possible background in journalism, or an article that was particularly important to her beliefs.

- The backstory on the journal Nissa was clear and engaging, especially with the story of how there were disagreements within the team of the journal, however there could be more with what Ghanmi did within the journal.

Involvement in Organizations:

- I like the inclusion of the specific themes that Ghanmi focused on. That helps to shape what she advocated for. However, with the themes (gender roles in family, equal education), it is still unclear as to what she thought about those themes. I am assuming she was progressive, but more information could be helpful. What were her views when it came to things like the status of women in the rural world?

- The information is relevant and up to date in this section, and provides an explanation as to what organizations Ghanmi was a part of, but not really what she did within those organizations.

- Overall, this part is similar to the lead in that it expresses what she was involved in which is important to understanding her work.

Images and Media:

- I really like the picture added of where Ghanmi and feminists met. It makes the article more interesting and also gives the reader an opportunity to imagine what her life was like in her work.

- The caption is great, it explains what Ghanmi and others were doing there and for the specific organization. A location could have been provided.

Organization:

- This article is organized well. The only pointer I would give is to maybe move the organizations above the Nissa magazine.

- The writing is clear and concise, this article seems professional.

- Every sentence has a point to it where information is conveyed. Nothing seems inadequate or irrelevant.

Overall:

- There are at least 2-3 sources.

- This article does link other articles frequently which is great.

- There are no spelling or grammatical errors from what I can gather.

- There are many sources which is good!