User:Smithlilly3/National Consumer's League/Cearly2 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?
 * Smithlilly3
 * Link to draft you're reviewing:
 * User:Smithlilly3/National Consumer's League

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer?
 * I think that the Lead already reflects the content added, except Esther Peterson isn't mentioned. But I don't think the Lead needs to be changed, since it is already succinct yet gives a good amount of information.
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * No, the first sentence is really short and I think it could be combined with the second sentence, but that might just be my preference.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * I think it essentially does. I don't think that the Lead is missing anything from the article.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * Jane Addams and Josephine Lowell are mentioned in the lead, but not in the article. Honestly, I think the second paragraph of the Lead could go into a section of the article, it has a lot of detail. Maybe you could combine that paragraph into your Goals section? I think it would fit pretty well there.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * Has a lot of detail in it, could be shortened I think. "The National Consumers League, founded in 1899, is an American consumer organization. The National Consumers League is a private, nonprofit advocacy group representing consumers on marketplace and workplace issues. The NCL provides government, businesses, and other organizations with the consumer's perspective on concerns including child labor, privacy, food safety, and medication information." could be just enough for the Lead.
 * Jane Addams and Josephine Lowell are mentioned in the lead, but not in the article. Honestly, I think the second paragraph of the Lead could go into a section of the article, it has a lot of detail. Maybe you could combine that paragraph into your Goals section? I think it would fit pretty well there.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * Has a lot of detail in it, could be shortened I think. "The National Consumers League, founded in 1899, is an American consumer organization. The National Consumers League is a private, nonprofit advocacy group representing consumers on marketplace and workplace issues. The NCL provides government, businesses, and other organizations with the consumer's perspective on concerns including child labor, privacy, food safety, and medication information." could be just enough for the Lead.
 * Has a lot of detail in it, could be shortened I think. "The National Consumers League, founded in 1899, is an American consumer organization. The National Consumers League is a private, nonprofit advocacy group representing consumers on marketplace and workplace issues. The NCL provides government, businesses, and other organizations with the consumer's perspective on concerns including child labor, privacy, food safety, and medication information." could be just enough for the Lead.

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic?
 * Yes, very much so! The Goals section was really useful information and brought a lot to the article that it was lacking.
 * Is the content added up-to-date?
 * Not applicable because the content is historical and can't be "up-to-date."
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * Not that I can tell. I feel like I got a pretty solid sense of what the National Consumers League is, from the content that was added. The Goals section really helped out with that.
 * Actually though - "A notable example of the NCL's activism and involvement in legislation would be the passing of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938." It feels like there could be some elaboration here? It kind of left me hanging at the end of that paragraph.
 * The Goals section largely focuses on their historical Goals, maybe include their more modern goals there?
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?
 * It does mention women's roles in the NCL and highlights their leadership roles in the organization.
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?
 * It does mention women's roles in the NCL and highlights their leadership roles in the organization.
 * It does mention women's roles in the NCL and highlights their leadership roles in the organization.

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral?
 * Yes, the content is neutral and written is a very straight-forward style.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * Nope, not at all. You did a great job stating the information necessary without making an argument.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * Not in my opinion.
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * No, it's very straight-forward and objective.
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * No, it's very straight-forward and objective.
 * No, it's very straight-forward and objective.

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Yes, all new information includes proper citations.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * I would imagine that there is more available literature on the topic, but I think for the content that is there right now, the sources are good. The sources seem thorough, focused on the National Consumers League specifically, and detailed.
 * Are the sources current?
 * Yes, some of the sources are fairly recent. I don't think the information needs to be current, in this specific situation, though.
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * Only come from 4 different authors, not sure about their diversity but I know at least that Meg Jacobs is a woman.
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * Yep! Links work fine.
 * Only come from 4 different authors, not sure about their diversity but I know at least that Meg Jacobs is a woman.
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * Yep! Links work fine.
 * Yep! Links work fine.

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Yes, it's very clear and easy to read. I didn't have any problems with it. I appreciate the straight-forward sentence structure you use, it's a very "Wikipedia" style of writing (a good thing!)
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * "who's voices" should be "whose voices"
 * a few instances where commas should be added, e.g. "As they progressed they turned their attention"
 * Otherwise, I couldn't find any grammatical or spelling errors.
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * Yes! The organization is really strong. I think its organization makes logical sense and the section you've added is helpful, to group all the prominent members together. It makes sense to have the Goals section go first as well, and the overall composition of the article makes sense.
 * Yes! The organization is really strong. I think its organization makes logical sense and the section you've added is helpful, to group all the prominent members together. It makes sense to have the Goals section go first as well, and the overall composition of the article makes sense.

Images and Media
Guiding questions: If your peer added images or media


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?

For New Articles Only
If the draft you're reviewing is a new article, consider the following in addition to the above.


 * Does the article meet Wikipedia's Notability requirements - i.e. Is the article supported by 2-3 reliable secondary sources independent of the subject?
 * How exhaustive is the list of sources? Does it accurately represent all available literature on the subject?
 * Does the article follow the patterns of other similar articles - i.e. contain any necessary infoboxes, section headings, and any other features contained within similar articles?
 * Does the article link to other articles so it is more discoverable?

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete?
 * Yes!! Most definitely. Especially the Goals section.
 * What are the strengths of the content added?
 * Your organization changes are really helpful, good choice making a "Prominent Members" section. Your writing is clear and in the right style for a Wikipedia article, very easy to read and understand. You made sure to explain things thoroughly, such as when you mentioned consumer citizenship and then defined it for the reader. The content you added filled a gap of knowledge about the NCL's historical goals and actions in the 20th century.
 * How can the content added be improved?
 * I suggested that you could bring the second paragraph of the Lead into your Goals section, since the Lead is a little lengthy right now. Some elaboration on "NCL's activism and involvement in legislation" could also be helpful, because the paragraph ends a little abruptly and it seems like there should be more information there than there is now. The Goals section also largely focuses on the NCL's goals in the past, and it seems like there is room there to bring in more modern information about how their goals might have developed over the past decades. It just feels like there is a gap between their historical goals and accomplishments, and then their current programs. There are also some minor grammatical errors and places where commas should be, but nothing major there.
 * How can the content added be improved?
 * I suggested that you could bring the second paragraph of the Lead into your Goals section, since the Lead is a little lengthy right now. Some elaboration on "NCL's activism and involvement in legislation" could also be helpful, because the paragraph ends a little abruptly and it seems like there should be more information there than there is now. The Goals section also largely focuses on the NCL's goals in the past, and it seems like there is room there to bring in more modern information about how their goals might have developed over the past decades. It just feels like there is a gap between their historical goals and accomplishments, and then their current programs. There are also some minor grammatical errors and places where commas should be, but nothing major there.

Overall evaluation
Does your peer have 5-7 reliable sources?

I think you only have 4 sources, from what I can see, so if you can, I would recommend bringing in one or two new sources from a new author. Could you bring in information from Cohen's book or another source from our class readings?

Is at least one of them a source from class reading or the "suggested sources" list?

No, I don't believe so. Meg Jacobs has a work in the suggested sources called "State of the Field: The Politics of Consumption," perhaps that has some useful information?

Does the topic link in some way to our course material?

Definitely yes, the National Consumers League is related to the consumer movements of the early 20th century and the prominence of consumer issues during that time.

Does your peer add historical context to their article?

I think you could add historical context by discussing the first consumer movement in the 1900s, how that might have coincided with the National Consumers League. The NCL had all these goals, but those goals would've been shaped by the historical circumstances around them. I think it would be worth mentioning the historical context of the consumer movements and the rise of consumer awareness during this time.

'''Based on what you know from course content, what do you think Wikipedia users should know about this topic? In other words, what would you recommend adding and/or considering further?'''

From what I know, what Wikipedia users should know has mostly already been added in the Goals section. I do think historical context will add to its depth though, and maybe filling in the time gaps from the early 1900s until current time, if there were any prominent pieces of legislation or actions they took that a Wikipedia reader should know.