User:Jackson Bracy/Robert Williams (psychologist)/YamilexPerez Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

(provide username) Jackson Bracy


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Jackson%20Bracy/Robert_Williams_(psychologist)?veaction=edit&preload=Template%3ADashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template


 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Robert Williams (psychologist)

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

The lead was not updated (no new content was added) and is not included in the new draft for the article. I think the original article has a good lead that guides the reader into what will be talked about in more detail later on. I think it should be included in the draft as it relates to main points you talked about in other parts of the article.

CONTENT

I think the content you added is very relevant to Dr. Williams. There was not any information that made me wonder why it was there. Perhaps, you might want to add more information about other positions of leaderships he held, for example, journal editor, president of any given association, founder of an organization, etc. It seems that the content is very centered on his early life and his major works. Maybe you could try to highlight some works that weren't noted as much as his work on Ebonics or IQ testing. Also, regarding the IQ testing, you could include some quotes of what people had to say about his work and/or what he responded to that.

TONE AND BALANCE

I don't think your tone is biased at all. I think you're just presenting the information you researched in a neutral tone, then it's up to the audience to decide whether they side with Williams or not. However, again, I think the article is heavily based on his major works, and yes, we're here for that, but you could also incorporate works that haven't been talked about as much (maybe some of his other books). I would suggest adding his awards, recognitions, grants, and whatever other acknowledgments he might have received.

SOURCES AND REFERENCES

The sections on Black Intelligence Test of Cultural Homogeneity (The Black Test), Coining the term Ebonics, and Racial Scripting are not referenced/cited (From my understanding, even if the contribution is small, it has to be cited so Wikipedia knows where you got the information from). One of the links I clicked (https://source.wustl.edu/2020/08/obituary-robert-l-williams-ii-founding-director-of-black-studies-program-90/) says he had seven children. In the section about his Childhood and Family says he had 8. Your articles are mostly written after his death, so they all resemble the same kind of content (biography). Maybe you could incorporate some scholarly articles, like a peer-review, about his work.

ORGANIZATION

The article has a good flow: going from his early life, to college years, to then his career and highlight major works within it. There isn't anything about his death though. If there are articles on it could maybe include when and how he passed at the end of the article. One of your references mentioned he was 90 when he passed and that his health had been declining years prior to his death. That could be good addition to that section. Also, check for instances where there was an extra space and period. I noticed it while I was reading it but can't remember where exactly.

IMAGES AND MEDIA

N/A

NEW ARTICLE

N/A

OVERALL IMPRESSIONS

I think overall the content you added did improve the quality of the original article. For example, there are small parts you added that make the article flow better and other sections where you added more detail to what was there. I think you did great and it looks really good.