User:Juliacat728/Climate Change Ethics/Nek39 Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Juliacat728


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Juliacat728/Climate_Change_Ethics?veaction=edit&preload=Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)

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 included an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic.
 * I would a brief description of the article's major sections in the lead so that people know the subsections you will be talking about. Maybe highlight that you will talk about global justice, intergenerational ethics, economics, and climate denialism.

Content

 * The content added is relevant to the topic and up-to-date.
 * There was no content that does not belong

Tone and Balance

 * The content is mostly neutral
 * I would probably change the phrasing of "Thus climate change can be seen as a global justice issue because the perpetrators of climate change impacts (developed nations) and the victims of those impacts (developing nations) are distinct actors." because it could be a little biased.
 * I think all viewpoints were represented.

Sources and References

 * All new content is backed up by a reliable secondary source of information
 * The content accurately reflect what the cited sources say
 * The sources current
 * The links work
 * The links to other wiki articles were also very helpful

Organization

 * The content added well-written (concise, clear, and easy to read)
 * The content added well-organized and broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic

Images and Media

 * I did not notice images

Overall impressions

 * The article was very well organized and clear to understand. The links were very helpful. My advice is to read it through just to make sure it is all neutral.
 * Also add a link to the "No Harm Principle" because I did not know what that was.