User:DrewMorales9/G.I. Bill/Wcubias Peer Review

General info
@DrewMorales9
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing:User:DrewMorales9/G.I. Bill
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists):G.I. Bill

Evaluate the drafted changes
(Compose a detailed peer review here, considering each of the key aspects listed above if it is relevant. Consider the guiding questions, and check out the examples of what feedback looks like.)

Lead
 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer? No, the lead ahs't been updated to reference sexual discrimination, so that should be done.

Content

Tone and Balance Sources and References Organization Overall impressions Additional Questions
 * Is the content added relevant to the topic? Yes, it provides very important context to the discriminatory nature of the GI Bill.
 * Is the content added up-to-date? It is a history-based article, so the content is up-to-date.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? No, the article is actually a very comprehensive account of the GI Bill, as it provides an impartial perspective, addressing both the success and problems with the bill.
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics? The article deals with the issue of racial inequality, so in that, it is addressing an equity gap.
 * Is the content added neutral? The tone of the content added is neutral.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?: The focus of the content added is on sexual disrcimination, so the viewpoint that the GI Bill was discriminatory is the primary viewpoint. I would not say it's overrepresented, because it provides important context.
 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Yes, the claim is backed up entirely by a singular article, which is a quality secondary source.
 * 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? (*additional question from Professor Heinz*) The content is only backed by one source currently, but the bilbiography page has a set of quality sources, including "A Consumers' Republic: The Politics of Mass Consumption in Postwar America."
 * Are the sources current? There is a diverse collection of sources, which vary in the year published, which I find to be very valuable.
 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? The content is concise, and an easy read. Although, this sentence could maybe be tweaked to cut some fat, "Although its efforts were to aid veterans in transitioning into civilian life, the GI Bill was the first-ever federal policy that discriminated against veterans who oriented their sexuality in a nonheterosexual way." Besides this, it is concise.
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors? I would change "The Veterans Administration" to "US Veterans Affairs Department," which is the official name of the group.
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Yes, the content is well organized, especially to provide a counter viewpoint, so the "Sexual Discrimination" section being added will fit perfectly under the "Problems" section which is already established.
 * 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 content added will help to bolster the counterpoint that the GI Bill wasn't perfect. Also, it gives valuable context for the other problems with the GI Bill.
 * What are the strengths of the content added?
 * Does your peer have 5-7 reliable sources? Yes
 * Does the topic link in some way to our course material? Yes, the issue of discrimiantion in the GI Bill was discussed heavily in reading A Consumers' Republic, and its very interesting to see the discourse from class make its way onto an offical wikipedia page.
 * Does your peer add historical context to their article? The content added provides historical context for sexual discrimination, which is underrepresented.
 * 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 would add a bit more content in favor of the bill. A section regarding the bill and suburbinziation would be very impactful.