User:Jasdeep-SH/Online social movement/Stan1500 Peer Review

Peer review
This is where you will complete your peer review exercise. Please use the following template to fill out your review.

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing? Jasdeep-SH
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: User:Jasdeep-SH/sandbox

Lead evaluation
Overall, the lead is concise but informative. The lead summarizes online social movement well. At the same time, it is neither too brief or too long for the reader. However, the first few sentence focuses on social movements in general rather than going specific with online social movements. It will be great if the lead can be restructured so that it directly explains about the online social media movement.

Content evaluation
Overall, I really like the contents added to the first draft. The history section is very informative and it contains a lot of useful information. However, same as the lead, more than half of the section is spent to explain about the history of social media in general. While I understand the importance of connecting online social movement to the traditional social movement to help the readers to draw connections between both, since this article focuses more on the online social movement, it will be nice if the history section can focus more on the online social media movement rather than the social media movement in general.

Other than the history section, the group did a phenomenal job with the benefits and detriments section. Both sections contain valuable information that can help readers to better understand about the impacts brought by the online social movements. To further improve the draft, I would suggest changing the section titles from Benefits and Detriments to Impacts of Online Social Movements and Criticisms. This way, on the impacts section, the group can not just elaborate about the positive changes brought by online social movements but also bring examples where a movement failed to reach its original goal and instead brought a totally different outcome.

Tone and balance evaluation
The authors did a good job in presenting the information in a neutral point of view. There was no underrepresented neither overrepresented point of view. All of the information was delivered in an unbiased manner, enabling the readers to see the issue from various point of views.

Sources and references evaluation
The draft was made using information collected from reliable sources. The group did an excellent job in utilizing various sources starting from articles, journals, and books. So far, I did not found any error with the links.

Organization evaluation
The contents were easy to follow and were presented in an organized manner. Each part is connected with the other parts within the draft. I also did not find any specific grammar mistakes. Lastly, the sections added in the draft included all of the essential points needed to explain this topic well.

Images and media evaluation
No images were added in the draft

Overall evaluation
Overall, this is a solid draft. The authors succeeded in adding essential informations that can further improve the existing page for the topic. To improve this draft, several changes can be done for the lead and history section. Currently both of the sections, seem to focus more on social movements in general, it will be better if both of the sections are restructured so that there can be more emphasis on the online social movement.