User:Phillyfan27/International Jewish Labor Bund/H3lic0pter44 Peer Review

. General info
Phillyfan27
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing:User:Phillyfan27/International Jewish Labor Bund - Wikipedia
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists):International Jewish Labor Bund - Wikipedia

Evaluate the drafted changes
Lead
 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer? - As the lead paragraph has not been edited and still has the original paragraph, I think that some small changes could be added to reflect the additions to the article. Also, it may be useful to include a sentence or two about the body paragraphs of the article. It does not need a lot of change, but a little more detail should be added.

Content


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic? - The article does a good job at addressing the different aspects of the IJLB. The revisions look like the add to the different content gaps.
 * Is the content added up-to-date? - It looks like some of the content is from mid 1900s, while still contains good information. I see only one reference from the 2000s.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? - I think a lot of the content that has been added and is in the article is relevant and important. I am not sure how much information is available in regard to how other people responded to the Bund's movement and what opinions others had on the Bund but that may be something good to add.
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics? - Overall, the edits and changes made to the article do address the contents gaps in the article. Although, I think if possible, it would be good to add more about what important voices there were in the Bund's movement.

Tone and Balance


 * Is the content added neutral? - I think the majority of this article does remain neutral and explains the motivations and the views of the Bund without implementing personal opinions. I will advise to continue be extra cautious as you continue to edit the section regarding the Bund's view of Zionism and do not insert your own opinions and to also draw out personal opinions that may be present in journals or articles you are collecting your data from.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?: Generally, I think there is an even amount of coverage given to the sections, Although, like I said earlier it may be nice to add more about the people's reactions to the Bund's movement.

Sources and References


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? - There is a  lot of the added information that is missing citations. Some of the content being added could get more specific as well.                                                                                     "Many historians believe that this original Bund was lost to the effects of the holocaust in Poland, the demise of the Jewish Working Class and therefore the demise of the Yiddish infrastructure." This sentence should be more specific. Who are many historians? It also needs a citation. The rest of the history section should include more citations because many of the sentences have uncited information.


 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? Maybe, I am not seeing the entire references section, but I believe that the sources could be of a wider variety. I am only seeing 4 sources from 1965, 1999, 2012, and 2016. I would imagine there is a little more available. Although, they all look like they are from reputable places and are scholarly articles.

Organization


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? I appreciate that the content is easy to read and easy to digest. I also like the organization of the article beginning with history and ideology and then moving into more specific aspects of the IJLB.

Overall impressions


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete?/How can the content added be improved? - There are definite improvements to the article, adding information where more information is required. And, also removing some information that is unnecessary.
 * What are the strengths of the content added? The articles explanations of the beliefs of the International Labour Bund is a really nice section of the article. It very clearly explains the motivations of the movement.

Additional Questions


 * Does your peer have 5-7 reliable sources? I am only seeing 4, but maybe there are more that were not included in this sandbox.
 * Does the topic link in some way to our course material? Yes.
 * Does your peer add historical context to their article? Yes, more was added to the pre-existing history section and provides greater detail for the reader.
 * Based on what you know from course content, what do you think Wikipedia users should know about this topic? In other words, what would you recommend adding and/or considering further? As our class is about the roads not taken, I think the article does a good job explaining this alternate idea of territorialism and Jews connection through culture rather than the land of Israel. Although, like I said earlier, it would be nice to see more about the response to the IJLB. Maybe adding even more information on why the Bundist movement did not last longer.