User:NoraMarie1603/Producers Guild of America/Riptide263 Peer Review

General info
Eleanor - User:NoraMarie1603
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:NoraMarie1603/Producers Guild of America
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Producers Guild of America
 * Producers Guild of America

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.)

Lead

 * It may be good to include his expulsion from the PGA in the lead. It is implied, but you could make a small addition if you feel it could be helpful for readers. "...until November of 2017, when Weinstein faced sexual abuse allegations dating back to the late 1970s and his membership was revoked" (something to that effect)
 * Overall, the lead is concise and summarizes the section well.
 * Some inline citations could be added, but overall it looks good!

Content

 * The content added is very relevant to the topic and details a sex scandal from one of the guild's premiere members.
 * The added content is up to date. It includes the most recent actions and events related to Weinstien's scandal.
 * The article as a whole doesn't directly address topics related to underrepresented populations or topics, but the new section most definitely highlights a famous instance of many where women were abused and taken advantage of in the entertainment industry. The author does a good job highlighting this within the article. Ex. "During the same meeting, the PGA's National Board — comprised of 20 women and 18 men — also voted to establish a task force aimed at researching and addressing sexual harassment within the entertainment industry. Despite the widespread gender imbalance prevalent in Hollywood's craft guilds, with women significantly underrepresented across disciplines, 47% of the PGA's 8,100 members are women."

Tone and Balance

 * The added content is NPOV and the author does a good job of stating facts with no present biases.
 * The author does a good job representing all viewpoints and adds in important information relating to the representation of women in the entertainment industry.

Sources and References

 * All content appears to be backed up by a reliable secondary source of information, but there is a lack of inline citations to support specific claims.
 * Upon reading the sources, the claims made in the article accurately reflect the sources.
 * The sources are through. Many are a part of what people in the film industry call the "trades." (Hollywood Reporter, Deadline, Variety) These publications are relaiable sources of information in the industry and are used by companies and individuals alike.
 * The sources are as current as they can be. They covered the scandal and actions taken as a result during the time.
 * All listed links are working.
 * The only downside of "the Trades" is that they often require subscriptions to access.

Organization

 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * The content is organized in a cohesive and easy to read way. Each topic leads into the next. The scandal is explained, the consequences imposed by the PGA explained, and shows that the scandal prompted the guild to create a code of coduct for sexual harrassment.
 * There were a handful of spelling and grammatical errors. I have provided examples below, but recommend double-checking before publishing changes to the main article.
 * "Weinstein Brothers awarded 2013 ' Milstone Milestone Award'"
 * There are a few places in the "Anti-Sexual Harassment Task Force" section that have spacing errors after punctuation of dates and between sentences.
 * "The Independent Production Safety Initiative (IPSI), add: was established in late 2018."

Images and Media

 * The user did not add images or media

Overall impressions

 * The article is more complete with the addition of this section. The author brings up an important topic in equity and the underrepresentation and historical abuse against women in the film industry.
 * The strengths of the content added is the overall organization, content, and tone. The content is presented in an easy-to-read way and the structure makes sense with how the information is presented.
 * The content could be improved by adding in inline citations to support claims. The author has a lot of great sources listed, but could utilize more inline citations to support claims. It also could help to see one or two academic articles to support the content.