User:SaveTheTrees365/Climate Gentrification/Cmg9327 Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

SaveTheTrees365


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:SaveTheTrees365/Climate_Gentrification?veaction=edit&preload=Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template


 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:SaveTheTrees365/Climate_Gentrification?veaction=edit&preload=Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template

Evaluate the drafted changes
Lead:

The lead includes a strong introductory sentence and clearly describes the article’s topic but does not include a brief description of the article’s major sections and instead gives a brief introduction and dives directly into the history.

Content

The Content added is relevant to the topic and it is up to date. As mentioned in the introduction and history the change in climate is strongly impacting the coastal cities and islands as many people are pushed inland away from the sea. The content that is added in this paragraph strongly continues the conversation of the impact on local people and continues to follow in line with their thesis and topic sentence.

Tone and Balance:

The content added is mainly neutral as they are not picking one side or another. They stay pretty neutral about the topic throughout the article. When talking about specific viewpoints they seem to represent both sides very well. They touch on both the low income and wealthy communities. They represented a little more on the low income communities which can be seen through the little Haiti case study. The content tends to persuade the reader in favor of the low income community as they are being pushed out by the wealthier communities due to climate change.

Sources and References

Yes, all new content is backed up by a reliable secondary source of information. The content does accurately reflect what the cited sources say especially in the Case study (Little Haiti) that was used "As sea level rises, Miami neighborhoods feel rising tide of gentrification". Yes the sources are thorough and they reflect a lot of what the writer had to say in each part. The sources also reflect available literature on the topic. The sources are also pretty current and are peer reviewed.

Organization

Yes, the content written is concise and clear. The added text does not have any grammatical errors and was very well written. The content is well organized into six different sections. I think instead of having the introduction combined with the history they could separate those into two separate sections and add a little more information on the history.

Images and Media

The article does not include images to enhance the understanding of the topic. I think once the article is finalized, including a few images would be beneficial to readers. They could include images after each section and subject or include them at the end.

For New Articles Only

The article meets Wikipedia’s Notability requirements as it is supported by more than 2-3 reliable secondary sources independent of the subject. The article contains an exhaustive list of twelve sources that fully represent the topic of the article. The article does not follow any similar patterns of other articles. It contains the needed section headings while having its own unique features. The article does contain many intex-citations where you can find similar information further explained.

Overall impressions

Overall I believe that this article is very well done and organized. The content added has improved the overall quality of the article and the article seems to be complete but could use some photos. The strengths of the content added is the case study of little Haiti and the solutions sections. The content added can be improved by including photos after each sub section.