User:Diegosalazarguerra/Oral Democracy/HirokiOsada Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Diego (Diegosalazarguerra) https://dashboard.wikiedu.org/users/Diegosalazarguerra


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * Oral democracy
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)

Evaluate the drafted changes
Lead

The lead concisely mentions the main characterisitics and definition of oral democracy, as well as empirical and academic origin of the concept. It has a quite convenient and helpful content box which I have no idea how the author managed to install.

Sources and References

Contents are backed up by variety of sources, and many of sources are new, rendering the article both fresh and trustworthy.

Organization

The author uses bullet points, numbers, and content box to organize the informations, and this makes the reading experience so easy. Regarding the grammer, there was no grammatical mistake that a native Japanese who learned English as a second language could discover.

Content

I admire the amount of information this article has, given that it is new article created by the author. I especially like the way the section of "characteristics" is organised. It has clear three points to discuss, and the three points are mentioned upfront. Since this simple characterization significantly helps us understand the gist of the concept, the three points could have been incorporated in the lead, particularly in the very first sentence as a way of introducing its relatively long definition.

With regard to the section "Challenges of Electoral Democracy and the Revival of Direct Democracy," even though the content is important to illustrate the uniqueness and significance of oral democracy, the way it starts can be seen as a bit unrelated to the main subject. I felt so because the subject is oral democracy and then suddendly the problem of electoral democracy began without being explained the context. Thus instead of starting with the problem of electoral democracy from the get-go, the section could start with sentences that goes like "the importance and uniquness of oral democracy are apparent/ most significant in following contexts: the problem of representation in the electoral democracy, and the blind spot of deliberative democracy." Again, however, the content itself here is undoubtedly relevant and important for the subject of the article, and comparison to other forms of democracy is helpful for readers to better understand the oral democracy. The same things might go to the section on "the Indian Village Assemblies, Panchayats, and the Gram Sabha." It would have been helpful by starting with a little introductroy sentence that contextualize the section in the broad discussion of the oral democracy.

Tone and Balances

The tone is neutrual but some reader might think that the article is biased in favor of the concept oral democracy itself in that it only mentioned the comparative advantage against electoral/deliverative democracy. But it is understandable since the article and the concept rely on the academic article arguing for oral democracy. Yet if we strive for a high standard of impartial dictionally it could have been helpful to have opinions against the oral democracy.

As a New Article

Given the difference between oral democracy and other forms of democracy, I am convinced that this deserves a new article. The aricle has ample number of hyperlinks that connect to other wikipedia pages as well.