User:Moony-20/Helen A. Neville/KobiIheoma Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Moony-20


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Moony-20/Helen_A._Neville?veaction=edit&preload=Template%3ADashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template


 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Helen A. Neville

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.)

Introduction: The first paragraph of the page was not changed, as it provides a good summary of the rest of the information on the page. You added more subsections with pertinent information relevant to what was said in the initial paragraph.

Content: The content you added is relevant to the topic. Adding the sections that go into detail about the different focuses of her career provides readers with good descriptions of her work and her interests within psychology. The information you added is also up to date, as you added content about awards that she has won in the last 5 years and even publications as recent as 2021. After reading your draft, all your editions seem necessary and provide a good basis for her life and work.

Tone and Balance: All the content maintains a neutral and unbiased tone. The contributions were written in a way that provides readers with a good source of information about Dr. Neville and her contributions to Black psychology, without using biased viewpoints and persuasive tones. There is no agenda being pushed with your contributions, only objective information.

Sources and References: I noticed that you cited Dr. Neville's CV 6 times throughout your article. but according to the wikipedia training modules, a CV is not the best source to use because it is self-published material. I would suggest trying to find a scholarly article or book that has the information you used from the CV so that you can implement that into your article. The Everipedia article about Dr. Neville that you used has a similar format to wikipedia in the sense that anyone from the general public can contribute to an article. Since it's not peer reviewed, it might be best to find another source so your content doesnt get flagged. Your other sources seem good, as they are functional, relatively recent, and come from peer-reviewed articles and websites not edited by Dr. Neville.

Organization: Your content is very well organized. The sections you added clearly state the purpose and accurately set up the content for the following paragraph. Your sections get straight to the point and they don't stray off topic. I think it would be a good idea to link the Wikipedia (if there is one) to the institutions and organizations you mentioned, like California State University, Northridge, University of California, Santa Barbara, and other institutions/organizations. I also noticed a few minor typos, so be sure to giver the article another run-through so you can edit those. Other than that, the article is concise, well-organized, and easy to read.

Overall Impressions: Your article looks great! I think it could be a good idea to maybe add information on what Dr. Neville is doing now if you can find it. Otherwise, I don't have anything else to add in addition to everything else I've mentioned. You added a lot of relevant information that wasn't in the original article and I believe you've made a great objective source for information about Dr. Neville.