User:LaurenLainez/Overview of 21st-century propaganda/Beyonce0414 Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Lauren Lainez


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:LaurenLainez/Overview_of_21st-century_propaganda?veaction=edit&preload=Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Overview of 21st-century propaganda

Evaluate the drafted changes
(Compose a detailed peer review here, considering each of the key aspects listed above if it is relevant. Consider the guiding questions, and check out the examples of what feedback looks like.)

Lead

The lead content is well updated from the original article by adding specific examples and expanding from what was already added. I think a specific introduction to the topics explained in the article would be beneficial such as introducing specific examples provided by the different countries. Including the sentence about what propaganda looked like in the past should be put back into the article in order to have information to properly introduce propaganda specifically in the 21st century.

Content

The content added does not appear to have any bias and any previous bias in these sections were removed. I think examples closer to the current date could be added to further update the article as most of the sources and examples aren't very recent. I think more information on Vietnam could be added as that section of the article is noticeably smaller than the other sections in the article. The article does a good job explaining many different aspects of the world which creates a worldly view, however, I think adding information on European countries if any would be beneficial.

Tone and Balance

The content that was added is neutral and avoids bias. Overall I think the content may appear biased as it is heavily based on one side of the world instead of including more views. This may sway the reader into thinking there is more propaganda on that side of the world which isn't necessarily true.

Sources

Some of the sources in the updated article are showing errors in the references section, specifically in the dates which should be fixed to establish the credibility. I think adding a few more updated sources closer to this year would be important in updating the overall information in the article. The sources are from a variety of authors and websites which is well done in minimizing any bias.

Organization

The content is broken up into clear sections of the article which makes it easier to read. There are a few grammatical and spelling errors in the updated version so I would recommend proof-reading the content before publishing it but other than that the organization looks good.

Images and Media

The images are well displayed in the article and enhance the understanding of the topics. They are well captioned and do are not against any copyright regulations. Overall, I do not recommend any changes to this section except for maybe adding an image of the United States propaganda to again enforce a worldly view of including an equal representation of all countries mentioned.

Overall impressions

The content does improve the overall article as it limits the bias in the article through the topics expanded upon. The previously limited sections were expanded upon greatly. The strengths added is a limited bias, more examples, and a more "worldly" view. The improvements I would recommend to the updated article would be to proof-read the added work, expand upon the Vietnam section, update the sources, and add a section from a European, African, or South American country.

Response:

I will be sure to proof read more while editing the article and adding sections for the countries you suggested is a good idea. Thank you!