User:Tasfiaxnawal/Humanitarian aid/Yessel Garcia 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? (provide username) Tasfia
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: User:Tasfiaxnawal/Humanitarian aid

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic?
 * yes
 * Is the content added up-to-date?
 * not sure because none of the sources were cited, but the latest seems to be 2008 which isn't super recent.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * I don't think so
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?
 * does not include information about historically underrepresented populations or topics

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral?
 * yes
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * no
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * no
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * not sure what text you added and what text was the original because there is no legend or visual appearance differences but overall it seems to be neutral

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * not sure which info you added or if you added the whole section but only the quotes are cited but the other information isn't.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * The quotes are relevant and add helpful data but maybe add a bit more context before or after presenting one?
 * Are the sources current?
 * most current sources might be 2008 which is a little older
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * Im not sure if a diverse spectrum of authors were used because I only know their last name and no other information.


 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * there are no links

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * for the most part yes, ideas flow but maybe try to add a little more context before or after using a quote? I seems like you just copied and pasted a quote but did not give any additional information about it, I think that would make the paragraph a bit easier to read.
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * there is a couple extra spaces added in the text but I don't think thats a big issue, other than I do not see 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?
 * the section is not broken down into different sections but the leading questions do help outline the paragraph

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete?
 * Im not sure if you were adding this whole new sub section to the article or you edited an existing section, but I believe that this text as a whole improved the overall quality of the article by providing a detailed example of humanitarian aid in the form of medical aid.
 * What are the strengths of the content added?
 * I thought that the empirical data used from the Frakes source was helpful to see the effect of medical malpractice liability
 * How can the content added be improved?
 * I think that two important changes that can improve the text is add citations/links to your sources and add some context or transition when using quotes.