User:Kjwonglam/Community food security/Seanapplegate 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? Kjwonglam
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Kjwonglam/Community_food_security/Bibliography?veaction=edit&preload=Template%3ADashboard.wikiedu.org_bibliography

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic? Yes
 * Is the content added up-to-date? Yes, for the most part. (I think in the trainings it said to try and incorporate sources from 5 years oldest)
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? No
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics? Most definitely

Content evaluation
The content added adds relevant information that specifically does well to address equity gaps.

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral? Yes
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? No
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? No
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? No

Tone and balance evaluation
The added content conveys a neutral tone.

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Yes
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? Yes
 * Are the sources current? Yes
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible? Yes, and yes.
 * Check a few links. Do they work? Yes

Sources and references evaluation
The sources incorporate a wide range of perspectives, and each source is from a different author.

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? Yes, with syntax fitted to each section's importance and potential topics
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors? No
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Yes, added content is appropriate for each sub-category.

Organization evaluation
Article incorporates interesting sub-headings and addresses each with specific and useful information.

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete? Yes.
 * What are the strengths of the content added? The content added creates a more holistic perspective on the topic. I specifically like the mentioning of "power dynamics".
 * How can the content added be improved? Potentially, add more examples of long-term community solutions.

Overall evaluation
The content added provides useful information in thinking towards structural factors that determine conditions of food insecurity/security. I find this to be extremely helpful.