User:Courtalbanese/Sexual revolution in 1960s United States/Katearb0n Peer Review

General info
Courtalbanese
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing:User:Courtalbanese/Sexual revolution in 1960s United States
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists):Sexual revolution in 1960s United States

Evaluate the drafted changes
Hi Courtney! Overall I though you added some really really great information. I have some suggestions below but i know you may still be in the editing process!

Lead
- '' Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer? '' It looks like you are mainly editing the Women’s Movements and Gay rights section. I think there is substantial evidence and historical data that you added to both of these sections. Maybe you might be interested in adding some of this information into the lead section to add introduction? I think you make really great points in both of the article body sections you edit and the lead could really benefit from that!

Content
- Is the content added relevant to the topic?

I think the content that you add to the Womens Movement section offers a better angle into the legal and organizational side of the movements. There are a lot of different types of media that you refer to as well. I think that this is very relevant to the topic. Especially continuing to talk about Betty Friedan and then building off of that into different topics is a really great transition. For the Gay rights section

- Is the content added up-to-date?  Since you are referencing a specific time period, the information you have added is consistent with that time. You provide a good lens into this time period and have ample information about organizations such as NOW. I think when you add more sources you will have a better rounded out approach to this article. The sources you have now are pretty recent and a good mix for the information you provide.

- Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?

I think that as you add more sources and find a class article to tie in that your content with be more well rounded. I suggest you may want to tie in Viders article as we have read the intro and chapters 3 and 4 which would prove very useful for your Gay Rights movements. For now you talk a lot about gender identity and gender performance.

Tone and Balance
Is the content added neutral?

Even though this is a political subject, i think you do a good job at a historians approach to listing the attitudes of the organizations and not your personal attitudes. Your content is very evidence based and backed by articles. Especially talking about the agendas of organizations and queer identities i don’t see points where you aren’t being neutral. Very nice!

Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?:

I think that your article may improve by adding identities and perspectives or other cultural, social, and racial groups. When you talk a lot about liberation and agendas, maybe you could benefit from adding about the opposite side and how they targeted these groups. Kind of like a counterargument of sorts but just specific to which groups were targeting them (women, lgbtq people and gender roles). You also may add if you like a different perspective like how people of color may have added or been targeted by these liberation movements.

Sources and References
Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?

From the sources you have posted at the time of this peer review (i know you keep a lot of information on paper) you have a good mix of pretty relevant sources. You use these sources a good amount in the writing you have added thus far.

Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? /Is at least one of them a source from class reading or the "suggested sources" list? If not, can you think of anything we've read that might be useful for them?

Right now you don't have a class reading added into the article, but you may choose Vider as it applies to gay identities. All of your sources tend to talk about gender identities and expression. If you don't have plans already maybe some sources about different topics could really broaden the article.

Are the sources current?

yes, the sources are from 1998 up until 2016.

Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?

Talking about LGBTQ people, yes, but you may benefit from other racial identities.

Organization
Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?

There are some sentences that come off a little awkward, I think after reading the passages you have written out loud, you might be able to gain some clarity. I know that we still have ample time to edit and add information so no worries!

“Friedan after the publishing of the Feminine Mystique in 1963 continued on to form the National Organization for Women (NOW) in 1966 Similarly to first-wave feminists…” - This opening sentence in the passage may need some punctuation or to be rephrased but it doesn’t read very well

“women in the 1960s also showed their protests by refusing to wear women's clothing, put on makeup, or grow their hair long.” - The verbs in your list need to be changed maybe instead use putting and growing? Totally up to you but this reads a little awkward right now

More similar things to that above where you might just benefit from reading aloud.

Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors?

oh I guess i listed that above

Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? I think you may benefit from breaking down some of your large paragraphs such as your second longer paragraph you might consider splitting it in two so that it might be more clear and articulate. You have a lot of valuable information to add, but consider treating it less like and essay. No matter what you choose i still think that the way it is now still has a lot of value. If you plan to add more information you might want to split your paragraphs.

Overall impressions
Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete?/How can the content added be improved?

I think the things i have listed below and above this question are summarized in; reading out loud, adding more perspectives, adding more references, and potentially splitting paragraphs.

What are the strengths of the content added?

I think that your additions to the article have started to give it more form and depth! I really like what you have had to say so far.

Additional Questions

 * Does your peer have 5-7 reliable sources? Currently from my end, you have 4 sources. I assume that you intend to build upon this so no worries :)
 * Is at least one of them a source from class reading or the "suggested sources" list? If not, can you think of anything we've read that might be useful for them? Not currently, as mentioned above i think that our readings from Vider’s chapter about queer spaces could really be useful in your article!!
 * Does the topic link in some way to our course material? The topic that you have chosen has a lot in common with our class themes. Although this is a really broad topic you have been able to narrow it down to specific events, medias and nuances of the 1960 and 1970s.
 * Does your peer add historical context to their article? Yes, although the parts of the article are restricted to 1950-1970s, i think that the information added is helpful for understanding more of the context around this time. You also talk briefly about the Second World War that is also very important to understand many themes around this time. Maybe you interpret this question in a different way and think of some historical context that might broaden your article even more.
 * Based on what you know from course content, what do you think Wikipedia users should know about this topic? In other words, what would you recommend adding and/or considering further? I think that this article could maybe benefit from some different racial and cultural viewpoints. We have talked briefly about black women and Chinese women, maybe you see some value to adding their perspectives. I also think you could benefit from reading your article out loud, there are a couple sentences that don’t flow very well (see above). In summary, you are very knowledgeable about this topic and add a lot of value to this article!