User:Mahimasinha/Prisoner reentry/Momoberk Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Mahimasinha


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Mahimasinha/Prisoner_reentry?veaction=edit&preload=Template%3ADashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Prisoner reentry

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 edits in the lead do introduce the new topics covered in the Healthcare re-entry section.

- The lead includes an introductory sentence that has not been edited, and I do not think it needs to be.

- The third paragraph in the lead is not as concise as it could be. I think some of the sentences could be pushed together or cut down because it is a bit wordy.

- The lead sets up the sections nicely.

Content

- The content is relevant and adds to the article as a whole.

- Some of the sources used are a bit older, but the content is relevant today.

- Nothing added seems out of place, it all is relevant and adds to the article but some sentences could be pushed together.

Tone and Balance

- The content added is neutral.

- The tone of the writing is neutral and does not seem to take a side.

- Content is written clearly and not aiming to persuade the reader; facts are stated.

Sources and References

- Great amount of resources used and cited correctly (10 scholarly sources).

- Some sources are older than others, dating back to 1999, but there is a good amount of more recent sources.

- There is a diverse spectrum of authors and writing included.

Organization

- The content added is concise and clear.

- Writing is clear and easy to read with some sentence structure that could be edited.

- No spelling errors that I saw.

- The third paragraph of the lead has very short sentence structure that seems a little choppy, and could be edited to flow better.

Images and Media

- No images/media included.

Overall Impressions- The content added presents a great amount of sources and new cited information that adds to the article.

- The best improvement is the Healthcare section, which before the edits only had one vague sentence. It now has a paragraph with three new scholarly sources information being used.

- The sentence structure in the lead could be edited, but the content seems great so far.