User:Funkyfreshadventurer/User:Xinyu Cai111111/Cybersex trafficking/Funkyfreshadventurer Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Xinyu Cai111111


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:Xinyu Cai111111/Cybersex trafficking


 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Cybersex trafficking

Evaluate the drafted changes
Xinyu Cai111111 has done a great deal of drafted changes on his chosen article, "Cybersex Trafficking", especially on looking into trafficking activity in different locations (Australia, East Asia, and Europe). These three sections are packed with current information on cybersex trafficking, which is both informative and detailed, and addresses one of Wikipedia's equity gaps (gender). Everything discussed in these sections is clearly explained, making it easy for someone with little knowledge on cybersex trafficking to comprehend the article.

After reading the sections Cai revised, my main critique is that none of the areas discussed have any background information or introductory sentences. They all dive straight into current events. Discussing when, how, and why cybersex trafficking became popular in Australia, East Asia, and Europe, before diving into specific cases could help the reader gain a better understanding about the current state of these areas and their trafficking problems.

For the Australia section, Cai could also talk about why the Task Force Argos executed a search warrant and what they found before discussing the man's convictions. Giving this background could be beneficial for the reader. Towards the end of the Australia section, IJM and OSEC are mentioned but they are somewhat mixed together- could talking about them more separately benefit the flow of the article?

The East Asia section was incredibly informative. At the end of the section I did get a bit lost. The last paragraph discusses a variety of issues and figures, and by the end of the paragraph I had trouble connecting everything the last paragraph discussed. Trying to separate the information here into a couple different paragraphs could help! The Last sentence of this section also expresses an opinion/idea of the authors' saying "... the penalties for those who possess images of child porn are far below international standards and should be increased immediately to discourage abuse." This sentence (although I whore-heartedly agree with it) isn't factual, but is more coming from a specific viewpoint. I'm skeptical as to if this is a neutral sentence that should be included in the article.

For the paragraph on the Netherlands, It would be useful to look into how the Netherlands is responding to its online sexual exploitation issue. Discussing how its URL problem is progressing/changing will give readers a better understanding of how the Netherlands is addressing this problem.

As of right now, Cai has not edited the lead page. I'm sure he will get to that, but I wanted to make note of it! The lead on the original cybersex trafficking page is quite long, though. Maybe Cai can cut down some of the information while trying to incorporate some of the new information he's added.

In terms of references and links, they are all accurate. The links are working and most references are from the past 5 years, which makes the work Cai is doing incredibly up to date.

There are a few grammatical errors throughout the draft, but they are easy to fix. Cai needs to make sure he's using the correct singular vs plural and past vs present.

Funkyfreshadventurer (talk) 01:52, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

~