User:Raearutherford/Nourishing Hope/Allanahpollard Peer Review

General info
Rearutherford
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing:User:Raearutherford/Nourishing Hope
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists):

Evaluate the drafted changes
Nourishing hope peer review

Lead:

The lead provided by the Nourishing Hope Group’s Wikipedia page is a good start to the overall final draft of their page. The lead does a good job at starting off very clearly what the page will be highlighting throughout. Though it is short, it is concise and clearly describes the article’s topic. What is said is very relevant to the article and while it is concise it could include slightly more information, but it is a really great start. It includes solid details but it could definitely lay out the topics more in the final version of the Wikipedia page.

Content:

Overall the content provided so far in the draft is relevant to the topic and presents key information regarding Nourishing Hope’s agenda. The content referred to on the Wikipedia page is relevant and up to date as things are referenced from the start of the organization in 1970 up until recent activity in 2023. The content that is provided is relevant and belongs on the page, however, there may be missing content as it is very much still a draft and may need more evidence from the five sources. The page refers to the help and specific activities that support populations in Chicago.

Tone and balance: The tone used in Nourishing Hope’s draft is very neutral and balanced. All of their content comes from a neutral and informative point of view which allows readers to get a balanced idea of the work they do. There is no clear bias towards any side or opinion on Nourishing Hope, and it’s clear this draft has been written in order to inform and not persuade. There is no evidence of persuasion towards having any particular opinion on Nourishing Hope which is really good. The content is very informative, especially with setting up and explaining some of their history, although it could use a bit more information it is definitely a solid start.

Sources and references: Nourishing Hope has included five solid sources but they do not appear to be hyperlinked or cited in the actual content of the draft. Since this is a draft I think it’s a solid start to have all the sources there and I’m assuming they will be properly cited in text during the next writing stages. All of the sources are very current and come from 2023 which is a good sign that there is lots of current information on the topic. I think overall  the content reflects the sources well, however since there are no in text citations it’s not as easy to identify which information comes from which source. I do think the sources reflect a diverse group of authors and perspectives, what I would say for the future is just to cite them in text better.

Organization:

Nourishing hope did a great job of drafting the organization of their Wikipedia page! They begin with the lead and then transition from there to history, operations, grants, programs, article body, and references. Overall, I think that this order makes sense. It falls in line with what I would consider to be an acceptable progression of thought about the organization. If a viewer were to read this page in the order that it is currently in, I certainly believe that they would be able to understand what Nourishing Hope is all about and have no issues following the presentation of that information.

Overall impressions:

Overall, the Nourishing Hope group did a nice job of putting their drafted Wikipedia page together. As was mentioned earlier, before even reading any details, it is clear that the page is organized very well– making it an easy read. Additionally, the information given on the page was definitely sufficient for a draft. While each section is not necessarily long in length, the needed information is certainly there. We know that by the end of the writing process, further elaboration and explanation for the different sections will absolutely be there. On the same token,  it would be great to hear about more detailed information for the “programs” section. This section poses a great opportunity to highlight the organization’s character and what actions are being taken to carry out positivity for the community. The references also appear to be trustworthy and displayed well at the end of the page.