User:GRogers3/Portuguese Gold Coast/Yonakrug Peer Review

Lead
Guiding questions:


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

Yes! Your lead is great, much more detailed than the current one, and you also touch on many of the things that you plan to talk about. However in your legacy paragraph you begin with, “The internal African slave trade established by the Portuguese laid the groundwork for the vast networks of human trafficking that would flourish in the region during the centuries to come,” a fact that I think could also be included in your introduction. What are these vast networks?


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

Because you are describing a geographical region I think your topic sentence is appropriate. I like how you establish where it is geographically.


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

Yes, you mention slavery, dutch competition, and ecomomy.


 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?

No.


 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?

It is concise, and straight to the point which is helpful as well.

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic?

Yes, very. The original page barely had any information on slave trade or ecomomy in the Gold Coast. I think what you added helps shape the reader's view of why the legacy is important.


 * Is the content added up-to-date?

Yes.


 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?

You could possibly include a section about politics I think that would help flesh out the state of the population (I looked for articles and couldn't find many though). There is no information that does not belong.


 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?

Yes.

Tone and Balance

Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral?

Yes, you state the facts very well and include none of your own opinions.


 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?

No.


 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?

No.


 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?

It does not.

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


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

Not all information is followed by a reference so just be careful of that. But yes, all new content has a paired secondary source.


 * Does the content accurately reflect what the cited sources say? (You'll need to refer to the sources to check this.)

Yes.


 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?

I think the sources you have are very good, but I think 3-4 more would be ideal just to ensure that you are pulling from a wide range of sources. You could maybe try looking into a documentary (Not sure if there is one)?


 * Are the sources current?

There is a good mix of older sources and current ones which gives a wide range of perspective. I think the earliest source you have is from 2016.


 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?

For the most part, yes. You have a few university presses and one source from the Historical Society of Ghana.


 * Are there better sources available, such as peer-reviewed articles in place of news coverage or random websites? (You may need to do some digging to answer this.)

Here are some more JSTOR articles you might find helpful:

https://www.jstor.org/stable/182922?seq=1

https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt3fhj7n.10?searchText=Portuguese+Documents+on+the+Gold+Coast&searchUri=%2Faction%2FdoBasicSearch%3FQuery%3DPortuguese%2BDocuments%2Bon%2Bthe%2BGold%2BCoast%26so%3Drel&ab_segments=0%2FSYC-6294%2Ftest_segment_1&refreqid=fastly-default%3A74f6cf56e8f04e415342aad4b7dfcc8b&seq=1

https://www.jstor.org/stable/41406424?searchText=Portuguese+Documents+on+the+Gold+Coast&searchUri=%2Faction%2FdoBasicSearch%3FQuery%3DPortuguese%2BDocuments%2Bon%2Bthe%2BGold%2BCoast%26so%3Drel&ab_segments=0%2FSYC-6294%2Ftest_segment_1&refreqid=fastly-default%3A8e5d44f2ee4c0bf2c29cdb22e8ae6c28&seq=1


 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Yes! Some of them feel unnecessary though.

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?

Yes, it is very well written and easy to read and follow. You set us up well with your introduction and then lead us through the details well in your writing. You also avoid convoluting the facts with your own opinions which is also helpful for the reader.


 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors?

No.


 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?

I think you broke down your sections very well, though I think a section expanding about the politics of the time would be beneficial (if possible). The topics you choose are great and help fill out the information gaps of the original article.

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete?

The article is far more complete. You nearly rewrote the entire article and clearly put a lot of effort into it. The original article lacks all information about economy and slavey and only has 2 sources.


 * What are the strengths of the content added?

The strengths here are definitely your Portuguese arrival on the Gold Coast section because you use clear language and all your points are fully explained. You also use a variety of great sources. I also like how you explain the lasting impacts of the Gold Coast’s trade and slavery.


 * How can the content added be improved?

I think something that you can include is the list of The Portuguese governors that is included in the main article. Maybe try to give this some more relevance by writing a small blurb about their significance to the economy ect. I think this is still valuable information. One more thing you could add is a few more sources just to add to the credibility of your information. Last, totally optional, but you can add some pictures of the goods traded if you find ones that fit. Overall, great job!

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

(provide username)


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

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.)