User:Jacob Khorsandi/Cellestine Ware/Kansastilbury Peer Review

General info
Jacob Khorsandi, Nollyrolypoly, BennyShirazi, and Shayan20011
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:Jacob Khorsandi/Cellestine Ware
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Celestine Ware

Evaluate the drafted changes

 * Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you? Yes. The article talks about Cellestine Ware's connection to minority feminist movements in the 60s and 70s, and how her experiences and thoughts lead to wanting to be involved in them.
 * Is the article neutral? Are there any claims, or frames, that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? The authors do a good job of keeping personal feelings out of the writing. The work doesn't appear to be siding with one viewpoint over the other, just explaining how they came about.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? Perhaps more can be said about the overrepresentation of white, middle-class women in politics and how this might have been more harmful than not having women involved in this field at all. The article states "Until the 1960s, the main demographic of those who participated in the feminist movement were white, middle-class women. While there were a variety of factors that contributed to the reluctance of minority women in participating in the movement, such as the apprehension of dividing the minority community, an emphasis on the social movement for black rights that was simultaneously occurring, and limited understanding of feminism, the key factor was racism". However, not much is said about what this specifically looked like.
 * Check the citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article? For the first four citations, there are no links. Only written names, so I couldn't check if they worked. The last three are the same source, which I don't know if this was intentional, but I was able to find the work. More secondary sources would make for a stronger entry.
 * Is each fact supported by an appropriate, reliable reference? Where does the information come from? Are these neutral sources? If biased, is that bias noted? Citations seem to be placed where they are needed. However, like noted before, most of it is coming from the same book, so this might just be only one perspective.
 * Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that should be added? Only one source that is from the last 15 years, so perhaps more could be added about modern thoughts on New York Radical Feminists (NYRF), and Cellestine Ware as a person.