User:Mpmill/Misogyny in ice hockey/Deedeeedits Peer Review

General info
Mpmill
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:Mpmill/Misogyny in ice hockey
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Misogyny in ice hockey

Evaluate the drafted changes
Lead:

My classmate has edited the lead of the article. They added a sentence about how most sports communities are steeped in many forms of societal hardships. They extended the talk from just misogyny to different types of racism as well as discussing societal gender and secuality norms. I think that although this is an important topic to discuss, this may be too broad of a discussion for this one wiki article. Maybe cutting out talk fo xenophobia and heteronormativity could make the article feel more focused.

Content:

There was not content added to more than on section, which is not a negative just that there wasn't too much information to peer edit. They added to the "Late 1800s to middle 1900s" section. The information was pretty unbiased and had correct sourcing. In the other section, not the lead which I already mentioned, the content added was relevant and up to date.

Tone and Balance:

The tone of the writing is a very wikipedia tone, not any avoidable biases seen in the writing. This person was very deliberate in the facts that they added without putting in their own opinion.

Sources and References:

They correctly cited many references that were added to the wiki article

Organization:

The information added was put in between two already existing sentences and helped them flow better together while also adding in some needed contect.

Images and Media:

This person did not add any photos.