User:Roshelle.Firdman05/Social construction of gender/Nicramirez1 Peer Review

Peer review
This is where you will complete your peer review exercise. Please use the following template to fill out your review.

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing? (provide username) Roshelle.Firdman05
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: User:Roshelle.Firdman05/sandbox

My Thoughts and Suggestions
I thought the first paragraph titled Body Image was very thorough and well organized. Most, if not all, sentences written were cited and backed up by a source. I do suggest that the same source (#2) not be used as heavily in this paragraph, but I thought that you did a pretty good job in starting to balance it out with other articles/journals. If you want to add so much from that one article, I would suggest adding more from other sources so it looks more diverse. I would also remove the part where you say "The article 'Body Image and Psychological Well-Being in Adolescents: The Relationship between Gender and School Type' explains that an adolescent's high school experience is closely linked to their perceived body image," and instead write something along the lines of "experiences in high school are closely linked to how they perceive their own body" with a footnote citing the article. This would make the paragraph flow better and have readers focus on what is written in the paragraph rather than reading the long title of the article. Citing in a footnote is the same as writing the title out, so as long as you cite and properly paraphrase what you want to use in your own article, it will be done correctly. This can be done for the sources you write out the titles for, like source 3, as well.

I liked how you explained all your edits on your draft page and it was easier for me to understand and go through your article because of this. I think you are right in that "stronger versions" is definitely too bias and violates the neutrality clause Wikipedia enforces. Also, I think that you have done a good job in editing and fact checking, as "since there is no math gene, gender differences in maths cannot be biological," is clearly an interesting claim. I would like to see the source for it and can imagine that there were more claims as this within the piece.

Overall, I really enjoyed your article. I think work can be done on minor sentence structure and citations, but in general, the article is well organized and thorough with all claims being backed up with sources. I enjoyed reading it! (: