User:Tyoudon11/Global care chain/Sambrooker619 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)Tyoudon11
 * Link to draft you're reviewing:User:Tyoudon11/Global care chain

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer? Yes
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Yes
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? Yes
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? Yes
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? Concise

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic? Yes
 * Is the content added up-to-date? Yes
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? No

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral? The only thing that I question neutrality on is the use of the term important when referring to the movement of workers under the first section, only because while the statement is true, I'm not sure if it can be expressive of a viewpoint or solely factual. Author may want to review it's neutrality.
 * 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? No

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Yes
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? Yes
 * Are the sources current? Yes
 * Check a few links. Do they work? Yes

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? Yes
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors? No
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Yes

Images and Media
Guiding questions: If your peer added images or media There were no added media


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

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? Yes
 * How exhaustive is the list of sources? Does it accurately represent all available literature on the subject? There are three notable sources, probably can't represent all literature on this subject, however it is a newly developed article
 * 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? Yes
 * Does the article link to other articles so it is more discoverable? Yes under the see also section.

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete? Yes, there was not an existing article before, this has added the information to the Wikipedia platform.
 * What are the strengths of the content added? The article is newly developed so it's adding information that wasn't currently available  It features two cases studies which gives the reader examples of what the global care chain is rather than just a textbook description.  It also includes three notable sources and links.
 * How can the content added be improved? The article is well written, however short.  Maybe add some more information if it's available from other sources to expand on the topic.

Overall evaluation
Good work, it is well written and the layout is good for a new article, content is relevant and concise.