User:Leenlovesreading/Design/CHERMEL.AUS Peer Review

General info
Leenlovesreading
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://docs.google.com/document/d/1f_D2PeHRWBl0mkjlazmxouFaBKlP0YX511ELX0TL0FU/edit?usp=sharing
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Design

Evaluate the drafted changes
In terms of the lead, there have been no changes as the writer has added a subsection to the article.

When it comes to the content, it is very relevant to the original topic of the article. The content added is up-to-date, especially considering that the subsection discusses design in terms of Artificial Intelligence, which is rather new and relevant to current day. In terms of equity gaps, the writers contribution does deal with it as the original article was out of date and did not mention a revolutionary technology.

The overall tone and balance of the content is informative, formal as well as neutral. There are no claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position and the viewpoints are presented well. The content added does not aim to persuade the reader in favour in one position or away from another, it is very neutral and informative.

Sources and references used in this draft include of peer reviewed articles and scholarly articles. Yes, the content does reflect what the cited sources say and the sources themselves are thorough and current. All sources are written by different as well as a diverse spectrum of authors. In terms of finding better sources, the writer could benefit from including information taken from a peer reviewed journal.

The content as a whole is concise, clear, and easy to read. There are hardly any grammatical and spelling errors, the contribution is very polished and straightforward. The content is well organised and done so chronologically, making it easy for the reader to understand and comprehend.

Images and media are not relevant to this contribution.

When it comes to overall impressions, I would definitely say that the content has improved the quality of the article. The contribution of adding a new subsection devoted to AI in the realm of design has strengthened the article by adding relevant and important information that should have been in the article regardless but was not. The content could be improved by going slightly more in depth in terms of the mentioned examples relevant.