User:Kcl55/Climate change in the United States/Lunathecat555 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? (provide username)
 * Link to draft you're reviewing:

I am reviewing Kcl55's work. User:Kcl55/Climate change in the United States

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer?
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?

Lead evaluation
I don't think my peer aims to change the existing lead of this article. They introduce the topic of environmental racism well though!

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic?
 * Is the content added up-to-date?
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?

Content evaluation
I think the content added is relevant to Climate Change in the US and is up to date.

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral?
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?

Tone and balance evaluation
A neutral tone is used throughout this section and I think it represents information about environmental racism clearly. It may not be necessary to say that Flint, Michigan is a well known account of environmental racism while Uniontown, Alabama is not.

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Are the sources current?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Sources and references evaluation
I was able to access the links to websites directly. They were both current and reliable sources of information. The other sources were reviews, so I think that they accurately reflect the literature on the topic.

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?

Organization evaluation
This content is well written and easy to follow. I like that there were examples of environmental racism in the US following the general topic of environmental racism. One grammatical thing I noticed was that you used BIPOC and SES early in the paragraph without saying what the acronym stands for (you later write out socioeconomic status, so maybe just rearrange that?).

Images and Media
Guiding questions: If your peer added images or media


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?

Images and media evaluation
The article does not include images directly, but there is a link to a visual to explain the Heat Island Effect, which I think is helpful.

For New Articles Only
If the draft you're reviewing is a new article, consider the following in addition to the above.


 * Does the article meet Wikipedia's Notability requirements - i.e. Is the article supported by 2-3 reliable secondary sources independent of the subject?
 * How exhaustive is the list of sources? Does it accurately represent all available literature on the subject?
 * Does the article follow the patterns of other similar articles - i.e. contain any necessary infoboxes, section headings, and any other features contained within similar articles?
 * Does the article link to other articles so it is more discoverable?

New Article Evaluation
The draft is not for a new article.

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete?
 * What are the strengths of the content added?
 * How can the content added be improved?

Overall evaluation
Overall, I think that the Environmental Racism subheading is a useful addition to the quality of the Climate Change in the US article, especially since the article is tagged for needing an update. Great job!

One thing I noticed was that it seems like some of the earlier sentences need a citation to support it (I was also thinking that it may just be that everything before the first citation came from that source).