User:Escadar Alemayehu/Postpartum Depression/Rbullied Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Laurencox1, Cek78


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:Escadar Alemayehu/Postpartum Depression


 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Postpartum depression

Evaluate the drafted changes
The new edits and added sections do a good job at adding information where the published article is lacking. The text reads neutral and unbiased, and does not appear to make any claims or propose any framing that would overrepresent a particular viewpoint. Information reads as objective. Citations are not added throughout the text body, but are included following the sections; It would be helpful to the reader to link where each source was used. It is difficult to tell if each claim/statement made in the draft is supported by a source, and which source was used where. The used sources appear reliable, neutral, and up to date. Introducing sub-sections throughout the added sections may be considered to break up the text and make the information more digestible/less daunting to a reader; this may be dependent on where the sections are added in the published page. It may be beneficial to introduce more hyperlinks to other wikipedia pages throughout the text, particularly in sections regarding geography.