User:Karsenpierce/Bombay plague epidemic/Jaguilar101 Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Karsenpierce


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Karsenpierce/Bombay_plague_epidemic?veaction=edit&preload=Template%3ADashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Bombay plague epidemic

Evaluate the drafted changes
There is no lead available, so all questions in regards to lead are inapplicable. As far as content, content added is all relevant to the topic at hand. Half of sources used are within the past decade, providing more up-to-date research. The content added also, in my opinion, deals with underrepresented populations in the fact that they mentioned workers in cotton mills. Content written out is neutral, and there is no heavy biasness found. I do not feel like there is any persuasion towards one side or another as there is a very neutral tone.

New content added does not have any citations for easy access in passages added. Rather, they are marked down as references at the bottom of the page. On two of the sources cited there are no links provided to see articles used at hand. Two of the sources are current, while one is 125 years old, or at least, there is no clear date as to whether it was released in that year, or if it is simply saying the date of the Plague. In other words, citations of articles used needs to be reviewed. The one link provided for the article works, however only because I have an OU account. With my own experience with Wikipedia, it prevented me from citing a link in such a manner due to it being inaccessible to other individuals trying to read it without an OU account.

Content written lacks in real overall structure, but this is a draft, so that is understandable. There are really short sentences that just feel like they don’t really connect with each other. However, there is a good outline on where the group intends to put each section written, making it well-organized overall.

There are no images added, so Images and Media section is not applicable, and this is not a new article so that is also not applicable.

Overall, I do believe that content added helps add more description and clarity to the article being edited. Some strengths are clear points and ideas that will be added in. In order to improve it, citations and using the reflist template on Wikipedia will allow for a clearer more precise citation. Review of sentence structures will also allow for a chance to make sentences more cohesive with each other.