User:Michelleho1100/Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program/Abains1721 Peer Review

Peer review
This is where you will complete your peer review exercise. Please use the following template to fill out your review.

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing? Michelleho1100
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: User:Michelleho1100/Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program

Lead -- No lead?
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer?
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic? Yes
 * Is the content added up-to-date? Yes
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? No
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics? Yes -- added in information about students facing hunger and SNAP

Content evaluation
SOLID

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral? Yes
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? No
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? No
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? No

Tone and balance evaluation
Great use of sources and wording to balance tone. Focus on less use of words such as while, unfortunately that preclude evidence.

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Yes
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? Yes
 * Are the sources current? Yes
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible? Yes
 * Check a few links. Do they work? Yes

Sources and references evaluation
Good! So many. Diverse and strong.

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? Yes
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors? Not that I could find specifically, but a grammarly check of content would be beneficial.
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Yes

Organization evaluation
Nice utilization of paragraphs to split content. Flowed and transitioned from topics.

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete? Yes
 * What are the strengths of the content added? a lot of important and vital information about students, previously not mentioned in article. New section created makes article more comprehensive.
 * How can the content added be improved? Removal of negative or positive connotation words that preclude or are associated with evidence/facts, in order to strengthen neutral and factual tone.

Overall evaluation
Amazing how much research you did, and wonderful in creating new section!