User:Strr34/History of the Communist Party USA/Aah153 Peer Review

General info
Whose work are you reviewing? STRR42

Link to draft you're reviewing:

The editor of this feature started with a lead section. The lead paragraph is coherent, straight to the point, but concise. The lead paragraph is a vital part of a Wikipedia page and I think the writer did a proper job of not simply defining what the Communist Party was (is) but also by including when it was founded and a brief description about the matter. Although, most leading paragraph posses those principles, I appreciate the editors lead paragraph because of the length. The reporter was able to meet the criteria for an adequate-written abstract, without the extra terms and irrelevant sentences. I appreciate the contribution that was made to the 1928-1935 section. The addition to the article is important because the organization of the page is in the format of a timeline and the added paragraph (by the editor) is super significant because in the paragraph above the preceding writer acknowledges the ABV and in the paragraph under the previous writer doesn’t speak of ABV again. The paragraph that the editor put in was an appropriate connection between the one above and the one below because, previous to that paragraph there wasn’t really much evidence for how African-Americans played a part in the Communist party. Not only is the paragraph in the appropriate space I also think it is one of the more thorough paragraphs.

The editor will benefit from adding minor details to the sub-topics and finding a way to relate the sections to allow the paper to flow better. The structure of the page is based on a timeline so I understand that the preceding statements may not be entirely connected but the addition paragraph that was added made a considerable difference in understanding that time frame because African Americans were mentioned once but not discussed again. Instances like that, where: important factors appear in the writing but are not supported by definition can lead to work that doesn’t have a natural flow.