User:Kbrenya/Property Rights in Ghana/Daniel.chun.ernn.kam. Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Kbrenya


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

Evaluate the drafted changes
Lead

Seems like lead is still being drafted, but seeing how thorough and well-composed everything else is seems like it should be pretty easy to write!

Content

All the content is relevant, and provides a great survey of both the history and modern dynamics of land ownership. Seems really comprehensive, so no real comments here.

Tone and Balance

I'd say it's mostly neutral, but in some spots some claims (without a clearer citation or empirical support) seem a little more argumentative than objective. This doesn't mean they should be removed, but if there is some data, specific event that exemplifies the trend, or a quote that could prove that these more sweeping statements are verifiable, that would probably make it feel more neutral. Or, you could also just cite a scholar who advocates this historical overview. The places that might need this more include:

"led to many landowners uninterested in taking care of natural resources they own because they know they will have to sell it to the government eventually"

"Rulers changed what was understood as traditional institutions of their state by manipulating the functions and capabilities of the state council, rulers, and laws of inheritance."

Apart from that, felt pretty balanced overall, and really liked how comprehensive it all was.

Sources and References

Seems to be work in progress, so no comment here.

Organization

Extremely well-written and easy to follow. A couple spacing issues ("rules.This" and "government.This"), but no other writing mistakes that I could find. Additionally, I think you might want to use the Wikipedia sub-headings and headings rather than the all caps and bold as section headers. Feels very well organized overall.

For New Articles

Without seeing the sources, it's a bit hard to gauge the notability of the argument and how exhaustive its sources are.

In terms of following the patterns of other similar articles, it seems others have more section headings when they enter the modern property laws of the country, where they dissect types of property in individual sections. I'm not sure that's necessary here, because unless there's a lot of coverage on these issues, I think the historical overview and division into statuatory and traditional law feels pretty effective.

Does not seem to link to other articles, but seems like something easily fixed in the next draft.

Overall Impressions

As mentioned, really liked the writing style and flow of the overall piece, and think it presents a lot of great information. I might emphasize the subjectivity of scholarship or objective empirical data for the more argumentative claims, and will need some edits to link keywords to other articles and add citations. Otherwise, really great work. Good luck!

Response
Thanks for your feedback Daniel! You are right that the lead is being drafted; thank you for reminding me to complete it. I agree that some areas are a little more argumentative than neutral. I had the same thoughts while writing the article and am still determine the best ways to neutralize that language. Thank you for pointing out those specific sentences that need a second look. I also appreciate your suggestion to include a section on modern property laws in the country. I think I may include something like this and elaborate on how those laws are practiced in the present day. Thank you again!