User:Grizz99/Antisemitism in Argentina/Shizeimay Peer Review

General info
Grizz99
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Grizz99/Antisemitism_in_Argentina?veaction=edit&preload=Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists):Antisemitism in Argentina

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
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer?
 * Yes, the Lead has new content.
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Yes, the Lead already explained the articles topic, and Grizz99 added an additional explanation of antisemitism more broadly, as well as its origins in Argentina.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * It at least touches on the major headings of the body of the article.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * The Lead additions include information about the colonial Spanish that does not currently appear in the body of the article.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * I think the Lead is quite concise.

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic?
 * Yes, it is all relevant to either Argentine antisemitism or background information.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * At first I thought it was odd to include information about German antisemitism, until I realized it was being used as a contrast.

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral?
 * Yes, well done neutrality.
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * No, I think it came across as very non-biased without persuasion.

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * I cannot see the sources, but where they should be are marked and on a separate page at the moment, and I have been told that they are all books.

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Yes, it reads very well.
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * Some of the sentences are pretty long and could perhaps be broken up a bit, but it still reads well.