User:Ruthy Flint/Playboy/Espalding Peer Review

General info
Ruthy Flint
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing:User:Ruthy Flint/Playboy
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists):https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Playboy&oldid=1175730240

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.)

'''First, what does the article do well? Is there anything from your review that impressed you? Any turn of phrase that described the subject in a clear way?'''

The article provides ample information about the topic without dragging on or lacking efficiency. The article is extremely well written and the amount of information presented is just right. I like how the section is divided into the three different women’s experiences and I think it is a very smart way to provide both information on the topic and the victims of this topic.

'''What changes would you suggest the author apply to the article? Why would those changes be an improvement?'''

The author could improve the structure and syntax of the Gloria Steinem paragraph. I noticed some places where the verb tenses are inconsistent and some places where the sentence structure could be varied, or smaller sentences could be combined to make the paragraph more concise. Additionally, I think the first paragraph could use some breaks to make it a few smaller paragraphs instead of one big chunk. The information in the paragraph is really good, it just gets kind of dense when you can’t really tell where the topic has shifted. The Jennifer Saginor section has good information but some of it conveys the author’s personal point of view on the situation which is not the aim of this article. Words like “yearned” and “tirelessly” used in describing people’s actions give the impression that the author feels a certain way about the subject.

What's the most important thing the author could do to improve the article?

The most important thing the author could improve is the structure of the paragraphs. In some of the longer sections, I think the author could benefit from one or two subsections as well as separations into smaller paragraphs, and in the other, shorter paragraphs, the author could just make several smaller paragraphs so the information is easier to digest.

'''Did you notice anything about the article you reviewed that could be applicable to your own article? Let them know!'''

This article kept everything very simple and organized, but also provided a certain amount of depth on each woman’s experience. I think my article could have more information with less division among different topics. I also think utilizing women’s experiences on the topic adds a lens that contributes to Wikipedia’s aim of closing content gaps among less represented groups, which my article could benefit from.