User:OneWomanOneVoice/Housing Act of 1949/IconRomano Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

User:OneWomanOneVoice


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * Draft
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Current

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: The author did not provide much content change in the lead section. I do appreciate the suggestions the author makes about what is missing from the articles current lead section. I would suggest to update the lead after the new additions of the article are inputted, to make sure the lead remains a balanced overview of the article.

Content: The author has not added much content, but they have included a general idea of what they intend to add. The background section needs more information to provide the reader an understanding of what was going on at the time that brought the need for this legislation to be passed. It would be good if the article could set the scene for what was going on generally at the time and broadly relate it to housing. Additionally, if there could be any events or issues that were directly addressed by this legislation this would be a great place to add it. The long Truman quote in the background section could be summarized to describe the Presidents support, likewise I would wonder if it should maybe be moved to legislative history as it's the Executive branch advocating for the bill. The legislative history section needs more information and so does the Provisions section, in order to be reviewed.

Tone and Balance: So far it seems to be presented from a neutral perspective. It could use more information about what Congress did, right now it is a little favored to the Executive branch (though, I'm not sure if maybe the executive branch just had a larger role).

Sources: I'm not sure if citing a header is allowed, I do like where the original article placed the provisions citation. I like that you linked important wikipedia pages within the text, incase the user needs additional background, reminded me I need to do this for my article. Your first reference is presented as just a link, maybe add more information about what it is. The sources look good, just need more to be added, which will happen as you add your content.

Organization: The article is nicely laid out, I liked the addition of the headers and the titles of each header. The article is easy to navigate. Only suggestion would to review the placement of the long Truman quote I already discussed.

Overall: When comparing your draft to the original Wiki article, it's clear you have made good progress. The original article is weak and needs more content. Based on the plans and what has been added I think once complete it will significantly better the article.