User:Comills3478/The Black Curriculum/Ks1793 Peer Review

General info
comills3478 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Black_Curriculum
 * Whose work are you reviewing?
 * Link to draft you're reviewing:
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)

Evaluate the drafted changes
Callista — your edits greatly expand on the background of the Black Curriculum. Key points were added, diving into who they are and what they stand for. You use peer reviewed articles and research as sources to break down the significance of the colonization of the British education system. We love trustworthy sources.

The Black Curriculum is abbreviated in the middle of the 3rd paragraph of the history section. The abbreviation should be introduced the first time ‘The Black Curriculum’ is mentioned.

The following sentence can be omitted from the 3rd paragraph; it switches the focus from TBC to the study: ”The study provides insights into the motives and goals of these decolonizing approaches, reviewing source materials, including reports, movements' publications, and official documents.”

The mention of the windrush generation should link to the wikipedia page regarding it. Here’s how to do it:


 * 1) Highlight the text ‘Windrush generation’ (can be un-italicized)
 * 2) Click the link button on the tool bar at the top of the page
 * 3) In the search box next to the word link, search windrush
 * 4) Select the main page regarding the Windrush scandal

AMAZING work!

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer? No
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Yes
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? No
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? No
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? Straight to the point

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic? Very!
 * Is the content added up-to-date? Yes
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? No
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics? Yes — it discusses major issues being tackled in the British education system.

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral? Yes
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? No
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? No
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? No

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Yes
 * Does the content accurately reflect what the cited sources say? (You'll need to refer to the sources to check this.) yes
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Are the sources current? Yes
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible? Yes
 * Are there better sources available, such as peer-reviewed articles in place of news coverage or random websites? (You may need to do some digging to answer this.) no
 * Check a few links. Do they work? Yes

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? Yes
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors? No
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Yes

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete? Very much
 * What are the strengths of the content added? Factual information presented which helps the reader understand TBC and its background much better.
 * How can the content added be improved?