User:EMILLS31/Great Depression in the United States/Alex Winetrout Peer Review

General info
EMILLS31
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:EMILLS31/Great_Depression_in_the_United_States?veaction=edit&preload=Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists):Great Depression in the United States

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.)

Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer?

Yes, the lead "Housewives' and Mothers' Activism in the Great Depression" reflects the new content added.

Does the lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?

Yes, the introductory sentence clearly describes the article's topic and is straight to the point.

Does the lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?

Yes, but I would recommend adding some headings for some of the paragraphs in order to break up the topic and give the reader on overview to each section.

Is the lead concise or is it overly detailed?

The lead is concise and straight to the point.

Is the content added relevant to the topic?

Yes for sure, the topic of the Great Depressions fails to mention the struggles of housewives, and the content added gives information and context that are relevant to the topic.

Is the content added neutral?

Yes, there are no points which seem biased or opinionated, the content added is neutral.

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

Yes, although I would recommend adding an in-line text citation for the second and third paragraph, as I see the source at the bottom of the 3rd paragraph but it may be easier for the reader to see a citation as it will directly take them to the references section and allow them to see exactly where you got their information from.

Does the content accurately reflect what the cited sources say?

Yes, from the sources, the content added is a great representation on what the sources cover and talk about.

Is the content added well written, is it concise, clear, and easy to read?

Yes, I would say the content added was very clear and easy to read, and I didn't find myself having to reread a sentence in order to understand what was trying to be said.

Is the content well organized, broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?

Yes, for the most part, I would recommended separating the sections by a brief heading that shows how the following paragraphs may slightly differ from the rest.

Overall Impressions and Evaluation:

Does your peer have 5-7 reliable sources?

Not quite, but there are 3 strong reliable sources in which all the links work and redirect the reader to where the information can from.

Does the topic link in some way to our class material?

Yes, the topic covers housewives and mothers activism in the great depression which covers some of the 20th century.

Based on what you know from course content, what do you think Wikipedia users should know about this topic?

I think Wikipedia users should know the importance and struggles of housewives and mothers during the great depression, as they were often underrepresented during this time.

Has the content added improve the overall quality of the article, is the article more complete?

Yes, the original article doesn't talk about housewives during the great depression, and it improves the quality of the article by providing more information and context to the existing article.

What are the strengths of the content added?

Some of the strengths I noticed was the amount of information added, how easy it was to read and follow along, the strong reliable sources, and the importance of the content added overall by providing additional context of the great depression.

How can the content added be improved?

The main thing I would recommend is adding a few more sources, and separate the paragraphs by a short heading that shows which aspects you are diving deeper in talking about. Also just adding a few more in-line cited sources linked at the end of the information your talking about. In one case in the 3rd paragraph, the article is listed at the bottom but adding a cited sources right afterwards helps the reader go directly to that article where you found the information from. It would take them directly to your references, instead of scrolling down and finding which one is the reference.