User:Mrichardson4/Sherlock Holmes/Angrycabbagemerchant Peer Review

Peer Review


 * Lead
 * I think that you might be able to combine the first two sentences in order to create a more solid leading sentence!
 * The lead does a good job of clearly describing the article's topic.
 * I would suggest adding a brief description of the article's major sections to your leading sentence.
 * Content
 * The overall content is relevant to the topic and seems to be up to date.
 * The article deals with equity gaps by discussing how BIPOC individuals were consistently used as scapegoats or villains within Sherlock Holmes stories to reflect the fears of England at the time.
 * Tone and Balance
 * I think that the content that was added was neutral.
 * I did not see any claims that appear heavily biased towards a position.
 * Sources and references
 * It looks like all of the content is backed up by a trusted secondary source!
 * The sources look to be current, from a diverse array of authors, and include historically marginalized people.
 * I was able to open all of the links which is great!
 * Organization
 * I did not see any grammatical or spelling errors.
 * The writing is well written, is concise, and clear. The only thing I thought was awkward was in the first paragraph when it says, "no medical training being used."
 * The organization of the article helps the piece to flow and breaks down the topics well.
 * Images and media
 * No images were included in this draft, so I would suggest trying to add some in the future!
 * Overall impressions
 * I think that the content could be improved by trying to include another example besides "The Speckled Band" to show other ways in which nonwhite individuals from outside England were thought to be the cause of contagion.
 * I think that the conciseness of the article overall makes it a very strong piece.

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Mrichardson4


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Mrichardson4/Sherlock_Holmes?veaction=edit&preload=Template%3ADashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template


 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)

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.)