User:H2lam/Ageism/Racoon dolphin Peer Review

General info
H2lam
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:H2lam/Ageism?veaction=edit&preload=Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists):Ageism

Lead

 * No changes to the lead have been made, which is fine. User notes that the article is well written (a correct assessment imo) and already has a good lead section. Most of the changes needed to improve the article are more around building on existing content rather than adding new topics.

Content

 * Content added is about how older people may face discrimination in the workforce due to stereotypes and inefficiency, and it's effects on people who face it. Content added so far is up to date and contains citations. Doesn't deal with an equity gap but that's ok since the section already focused on less focused on age groups. If you really wanted to look at equity gaps you could add a section about how other stereotypes tie into agism (ie does classism/racism etc. make it worse).

Tone and Balance

 * The content added is neutral and a good addition to the article. There is no real bias in the edit, as it just focuses on how old people can face agism in the workplace. While this would be considered a majority view/focus, the fact that the employment section had specific info about young people and women and not old people made it a bit too minority viewpoint oriented, especially considering much of the original laws and discussion around agism in the workplace focuses on older workers.

Sources and References

 * Sources are from reliable publishers and are cited correctly. They are used to back up claims made in the edits, overall no complaints here.

Organization

 * Content added is decently well written. It might be worth spending some time rearranging the ordering and flow of the edit vs the rest of the article though, as now it reads like: while the focus started with old people, it now includes young people -> young women -> back to old people -> clunky sentence about retirement age from original article -> laws. The flow could definitley be worked on here by incorporating the retirement age sentence, and maybe rearranging old people to the beginning of the section so that the transition to young people makes more sense.

Overall

 * Worthwile information about agism against old workers in employment, information added is good overall and sourced well, needs work on the overall flow of the entire section though.