User:Marie Emerson/Educational inequality in the United States/Mxf315 Peer Review

General info
Marie Emerson
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:Marie Emerson/Educational inequality in the United States - Wikipedia:
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists):Educational inequality in the United States - Wikipedia

Evaluate the drafted changes
Lead

- The lead makes known what the knew content will be

- There is an introduction provided to the information being added

- There is no brief description present beforehand but it is not necessary to summarize all the articles to be edited

Content

- Although the article itself is long, it is good that you focused on a very under-developed part of the article you chose to add information to, meaning it deals with an area of Wiki's "equity gap"

- Reading over the information you will be adding, there do not seem to be any grammatical errors and the citations also appear to be formatted correctly and present after every main idea

Tone and Balance

- The content should not present as biased to a neutral reader and makes no attempts to persuade the reader; facts are used and presented with wording that should not skew the mindset of the reader

- the topics talked about seem to be covered equally so there is not over or underrepresented viewpoints

Sources and References

- The references cited all, from initial view, seem to be appropriate for Wikipedia's standards

- I checked the references and tried to locate all the parts in the secondary sources of information were referring to and was able to find them easily; this also means the links work for the sources; some areas in the bibliography appear to have code lingo in them which I do not understand, but they do work

- I like that you integrate information we learned about in class to the article

- In all, the sources are current and come from a variety of authors

Organization

-Reading the information in the sandbox makes it seem that it is missing context, however, reading it within the scope of the article to be edited, the information becomes clear

Overall impression

- Very well thought out draft and good work on gathering as many sources as you did

- I like that you integrate information we learned about in class to the article

- great work overall and well thought-out additions