User:SleepDrifter/Privatization of the electricity sector in Cameroon/Krystawalicki Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Users: SleepDrifter & Juliagonsman


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


 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * N/A

Evaluate the drafted changes
Add lead. Content is relevant and for the most part up to date, but I suggest addressing the gap from early 2000s to the present. Expand on state's involvement in economy. Not sure if Wikipedia's equity gap concern applies here, but maybe throw in something about social impacts and/or economic impacts of electricity privatization on marginalized groups within Cameroon (if you can find anything). Overall content is neutral, just a couple things to address: adjust bias in "deemed important by scholars"; avoid making predictions about the future scarcity of resources. I would also refrain from describing outcomes as "positive" and "negative". Sources look good, lots of energy journals and IMF/World Bank reports, and information written looks like it's in line with what's written in the source material. It might be a good idea to find sources like articles/news reports to get a feel for local/national feeling or response and add variety in voice. Content is easy to read, but I think the headings can be organized better to have a flow to them. I would lead with the role of electricity in Cameroon and divide background into a history section and maybe a scientific/factual overview. Then I'd go into company involvement and add a section about outcomes and responses. Try to address equity gap by including local responses to privatization. If it makes it easier you could probably add links to wikipedia articles on electricity, privatization, and some of the different organizations you mention. Adding images and some info boxes (maybe important dates with legislation or a list of energy companies) will contribute vastly to the article. Overall, good work so far. I think you've got main ideas down, but try to elaborate and explain them a bit more (which I think will be easier once restructured), followed with impacts to address the equity gap, some grammatical and bias fixes, and find some more sources to really strengthen your article.