User:MayaLis1/Environmental movement in the United States/Avrillarios Peer Review

General info
MayaLis1
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:MayaLis1/Environmental movement in the United States:
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Environmental movement in the United States

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.)

Hi Maya!

I really enjoyed reading the edits your hoping to make to the article Environmental movement in the United States. You did such a great job finding a "landing spot" that allows you to share so much of your research.

There are a few suggestions I have you for, however. The first one would be to make sure that you are properly citing throughout the text, especially when there are direct quotes. For the most part, you did a great job of doing this, but at the end of the second paragraph when you are stating the main principle of the movement, it may be necessary to cite that quote. Another area that may need a citation is the Communities for a Better Environment section. It would be useful to know where you gained the knowledge from regarding that that topic.

Another small recommendation I have is that if you play to abbreviate the term environmental justice to EJ, it would be useful to introduce that abbreviation prior to using it to prevent any confusion. For example, you can say "Environmental justice (EJ) in itself is a relatively new concept in the US–it did not come into regular use until 1982...". This will ensure that the reader knows exactly what you are referring to when you say EJ.

While you did provide so much amazing information, I am curious to how this may create an imbalance in the article as the environmental justice section is currently just a small bullet point like the other points mentioned. Adding this much information may create an overrepresentation of the environmental justice section in this article. This may be something that future editors are supposed to fix by adding more information on the other sections, but just a thought.

Your tone is very neutral and sticks to being informative rather than biased in any way. I also really liked how you were able to link in so many different Wikipedia articles; it really shows how interconnected and relevant these things are.

Finally, just a question I had while reading your text was where the United Church of Christ (UCC) Commission for Racial Justice came into play in this situation? Are they typically the largest and/or only actor when dealing with these issues? This may not even be something you discovered in your research, but if so, could be interesting to add for context.

Overall, such a great job!