User:Denizmasjedi/Asylum in the United States/Taylor.daws Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Deniz Masjedi


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:Denizmasjedi/Asylum in the United States
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Asylum in the United States

Evaluate the drafted changes
ln terms of content, I think your organization is very clear and the information you have provided is relevant and fits into the article you are adding to. However, I do think parts of the article may not be completely written in a neutral voice. For example at the bottom of the first paragraph when you say "Approaches must" I would maybe say, "individuals who do not support job-first programs argue that we must." This makes it sound less like you are voicing your personal opinions in the paper. Are there any arguments for a job-first approach that could balance out the argument and make it more of a neutral piece? Just so it doesn't lean too much to the bottom-up perspective. And in the second paragraph when you say "efforts must" and "anti-poverty measures must" I would suggest rephrasing this also.

Overall I think this is very important information and I think you went into just enough detail for me to get a thorough understanding of the problems around refugee resettlement. You presented the information in a clear and interesting way that kept me engaged in the article. My one suggestion as I mentioned about is to add some perspectives of the other side and stay away from words like "must" to make the tone of the essay more neutral. I think the bottom-up, anti-job first approach is more highly represented in the section you added. However this may not be a problem if the rest of the article that's already written focuses on the other perspectives.

Citations

I would try and find URL's for your citations so that users are able to easily click and go to the sources you are using to verify the information. Having said this, I think you did a great job using a variety of sources throughout the article and citing all of your information. It also seemed like all of your sources were very reliable after skimming over a few of them.