User:Lindsmach/Genographic Project/Ciarrai32 Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Lindsmach


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Lindsmach/Genographic_Project?preload=Template%3ADashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template


 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Genographic Project

Lead Article:
The lead article has not been updated to reflect the additional content. You could add a few sentences to the lead article about your research into the criticism of the Genographic Project.

Content:
The drafted content seems to be up to date in relation to the start of the Genographic Project in 2005. The content discusses the impact of the Genographic Project on the Native American population, which has historically been underrepresented. The subsection on the criticism of the Genographic Project focuses on the ulterior motives of the project, which included political motivations, rather than scientific research. The political motivations of the Genographic Project could use some more detail in the article as it seems like an integral part of the criticisms of the project.

Tone and Balance:
The content added focuses on the criticisms of the Genographic Project which would tend to be more biased. This is fine since you are offering one opposing view for the Genographic Project. Just ensure that there is coverage of the benefits of the Genographic Project in the article for a balanced and neutral tone.

Sources and Reference:
All of the drafted content in the sandbox has references included. However, there are only two sources used. It might be beneficial for your contribution if you find more articles that discuss the criticisms of the project further. The sources are current and written by a diverse group of authors.

Organization:
The content is well written and easy to read. However, there are some grammatical and spelling errors (e.g. "additional"). It would be beneficial for your article if you proofread it before publishing to the main article. Since the contribution is on the shorter side, there is no need to further divide it into more subheadings.