User:Ren.Wall/Deafness in Japan/Laurenmacch Peer Review

Content
The content added is relevant to the topic of Deafness in Japan and there is no content that is irrelevant (or does not belong). Most of the content added is up-to-date. This article addresses topics related to historically underrepresented populations (being the deaf population of Japan).

Tone and Balance
The content added is written in a neutral tone and is unbiased ( the article is just stating the facts). I did not see any claims that appear to be heavily biased. I think that it would be beneficial to add other relevant issues in the Human and Civil Rights section, such as voting, encounters with law enforcement (which you briefly mentioned in the Healthcare and support systems section of the CRPD initial report of Japan) or societal/cultural beliefs that may affect the human and civil rights of the Deaf community in Japan. The article content is not written in a manner that persuades the reader to favor one position or another.

I do not think there are sections that are overrepresented or underrepresented. However, I think your Human and Civil rights section contains more specific details than the other sections of your article.

Sources and References
All of the sources used in this article are reliable. The claims in your article directly reflect the information in the sources used and all the links in the citations work. Some of the sources are less current such as the article/source "Resistance and Co‐optation: the Japanese Federation of the Deaf and its Relations with State Power" which was published in 2002 and "The use of word to identify distinctive gestural systems on Amami Island" which was published in 1999. However, most of the sources are current. The sources used were written by a diverse spectrum of authors.

You did a great job of making sure that every claim had a citation. However, I will mention that the listed timeline in the Significant Organization does not have a citation after every claim ( but does have an overall citation next to the timeline heading). I am not sure if you are suppose to have a citation after every claim in that case, but I thought it was worth mentioning.

Organization
The content in the article is overall clear and easy to read. I think the subsections that you added in the "CRPD initial report of Japan and Concluding Observations" report and "List of Issues Report" help to organize the information. The topics are broken down in sections, again, making this article very well organized.

In the Language Emergence section I think it is worth mentioning what exactly a shared signing community is, because most people (outside of our class or not educated about the history of sign languages) will not know what it is.

Images and Media
There are no images or media.

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

(provide username)


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

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.)