User:Krao01/Steady-state economy/TheAlexRodriguez 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? Krao01
 * Link to draft you're reviewing:

Lead evaluation
I think you lead needs to have more clarity and more substance. This does not even include adding more information. I recommend even combining the two sentences into one so that the reader can fully understand the information you will be adding. Something of the sort: "Renowned economist Jason Hickel has written about the ideology of green-growth as the idea that as capitalism and systems expand, natural resources will also expand naturally, as it is compatible with our planet’s ecology." -

Content evaluation
The content is very well-written and provides depth to the existing conversations founded in this article. I appreciate the fact that you are providing the more dialogue to the conversation provided by Jason Hickel and adding more knowledge to the issue of the green theory myth.

Tone and balance evaluation
The tone is neutral and not too seemingly bias. Whatever language you use will sound kinda bias because you're introducing a new idea to a conversation that refutes an old one, but I dont think your tone sounds demeaning or too aggressive to the point where it seems personal.

Sources and references evaluation
All the sources are up to date and reliable! There was one line about where you talk about environmental racism that needs a citation!

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
The content is very well-written and provides great addition to the article. It is clear and demanding. I personally think it fits right into the 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
I believe that this addition to the section is very well-needed and written extremely well. I would note to make sure you always cite your sources, even if it is in the sandbox. Kudos to you!