User:Nick986282030/New International Economic Order/Stevenzhang4949 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

 * I am reviewing Nick's article on New International Economic Order.
 * This is the link to the draft User:Nick986282030/New International Economic Order

The topic is well introduced at the beginning of the article. The definition includes the specific name of the organization involved in the creation of the New International Economic Order (NIEO). It also portrays an attempt to elaborate on NIEO's purpose in international trade. NIEO is also placed in its proper context by mentioning the period of formation, which is indicated to be the 1970s. However, in listing the purpose of NIEO, you ended the examples with an ambiguous term, ‘other means.’ It is not clear on what ‘means’ you are implying in the message. In such regard, it makes the reader guess what you meant to say. I wish you stated something more elaborate to maintain the reader engagement that you demonstrated at the beginning of your definition.

The writing is also well-organized. I was able to navigate through the content with the help of the sub-headings. I am happy that you maintained the structural organization of the original Wikipedia article since it makes the text easy to understand. F or example, having the ‘introduction’ and ‘history’ sub-sections. Under the history sub-section, I also noticed the chronological order of events. You were able to mention events that happened before, during, and after the formation of the NIEO. This effort improved the overall structural presentation. I would want to use this structural organization in my reviews too.

Essentially, you tried to maintain a general balance throughout the article. The introduction was of considerable length. I also feel like you tried to be concise in your writing by capitalizing on stating factual data. It also reduced subjectivity and helped you achieve objective reporting. However, I think the article would be better if the penultimate sentence in the introductory paragraph were briefer than the way it is. Commendably, the history sub-section was also well presented. Its sentences are adequately explained to paint the historical background picture.

Additionally, your text is relatively free from bias, in my opinion. Your analysis includes specific statistical data with special mentioning of facts. The examples used in the explanations are not showing any interest in showing the negative or positive side of anything. The situation could have been different if you tried to use persuasive language. In this case, the neutrality factor that is crucial for writing Wikipedia articles would have been lost.

Lastly, I noticed that you referenced an academic journal in your text. It reinforces the thought that NIEO was a reformation of former structure and processes in the political and economic world as well as a shot at classical liberalism in the global economy towards the end of the twentieth century. In this light, I feel the referenced material was presented accurately. At my convenience, I can refer to the article using the information provided to read more about the author’s view. Perhaps, you would have compared other pieces of literature to strengthen your explanations. I would have loved to see the comparison of research in the history section to understand the course, patterns, and developments of NIEO. Coupled with the existing data that you presented, the modified article would have been more abundant in content. All in all, it was a good attempt. Thanks for you draft and stay safe!