User:Michael.gary16/Liquid democracy/Monikolov Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Michael.gary16


 * Link to draft you're reviewing: User:Michael.gary16/Liquid democracy
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists): Liquid democracy
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists): Liquid democracy

Evaluate the drafted changes
I think that the section you worked on is relatively strong. You clearly put time and effort into your research and write-up process. There are just a couple areas that I think you can improve upon. First of all, I would encourage you to be more careful about maintaining a neutral tone. There are some instances where you make claims, albeit small one, that go unsupported by evidence. For example, you say that "In most developing countries, not every citizen has access to a smartphone . . . ." Statements like these are a little dangerous because it's unclear what you mean about developing and the threshold for "most." Beyond this, saying "not every citizen" is kind of a low bar. This kind of phrasing seems biased towards portraying "developing countries" in a bad light. A simple fix for instances like these may just be to find a source for this kind of information so that you're clearly citing empirical evidence.

Another thing I would encourage you to improve upon would be to expand upon some of your ideas. This could help provide a clearer picture of the points you're trying to emphasize. For example, you state that the public may make a "mistake about the common good," making liquid democracy questionable. In this instance, I think it would be helpful if you also defined what you mean by the "common good." Moreover, you drop a couple quotes in this paragraph that could benefit from further explanation.

Overall, I enjoyed reading your changes to this article! Great job, and I look forward to seeing how you choose to revise.