User:Turtle232/Ontological insecurity/5th ninja turtle Peer Review

The lead is concise and summarizes important information about the topic of the article well. I also like that at the end of the lead paragraph it states what the rest of the article will be discussing. The content of the article is relevant to the topic and the tone of writing is neutral. The sections are also well organized and well written. There is a good number of reliable, mostly current sources.

For some suggestions: The lead needs to briefly summarize some important information from the other sections. It only makes mention of later discussing ontological security in regards to relationship, but it doesn't actually describe what that connection is. It also doesn't mention loneliness or anomie at all. I think that if the article doesn't plan on discussing the areas that current literature on ontological security is centered around (sociological effects, politics, etc.) then there is no need to bring it up since it is not relevant to the article. There are a few (non-book) sources that don't have links.

Overall, great job!

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

(provide username)


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)

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.)