User:Skjordan2002/Abreaction/Ejohnson7 Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Skjordan2002


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Skjordan2002/Abreaction?veaction=edit&preload=Template%3ADashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template


 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Abreaction

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.)

Lead: The lead has not been updated by my peer, so if this is an area you are working on or planning on changing then you should add a note to your draft page.

Content: The information added to the article was relevant to the topic. It was research conducted on the topic of abreaction and how to approach abreaction. There isn't much information added to the article, with only one source added for the information added. I'm not sure when this article was written because there are no dates on the citation and when I clicked on the link, I couldn't find the article. There should be more content added to the article, or more of a variety of sources included instead of only one.

Tone and Balance: The content added has a neutral tone to it. You aren't trying to insert your opinion into the article and made sure to stick to important information. You aren't trying to persuade the reader in any way because this topic is hard to influence the reader.

Sources and References: More sources need to be added from a diverse spectrum of authors to be able to defend your knowledge on this topic. The source you did use is reliable, being from a database provided by the UI Library. I'm not sure if this source is current because I can't find a date on when it was written. The links didn't pull up the article immediately, maybe check your citations.

Organization: The paragraph you added is well-written and easy to read.