User:Unique-individual/Nonverbal communication/Blakemurray7 Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Unique-individual


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Unique-individual/Nonverbal_communication?veaction=edit&preload=Template%3ADashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template


 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Nonverbal communication

Evaluate the drafted changes
Lead

The lead seems severely lacking as I believe there is some confusion as to what the article body was supposed to be as it feels like this is a keep on the page self rather than the addition of new information and the proposal for a new sense of content. With such ideas missing it's hard to interact and give a proper description of how the content could have been added because there is no content to add it is rather simply  a collection of criticisms and at the primary paragraphs of the article.

Content

As I previously mentioned this rough draft seemingly is a critique board rather than a possible addition to the article presented. While there is a slight work map that is presented within the article body definition and links provided with ideas that are presented it is hard to have a comprehensive idea of where that was trying to lean and therefore makes it difficult to identify what content is missing or what was supposed to be added. Based off that assumption it's difficult in order to fill in certain gaps for that knowledge.

Tone and Balance

The content that is presented in the form of bullet points appears neutral and does follow the tone and structure of the article itself. There is no true identification of over-representation or under-representation from any direct group as the presented articles are somewhat hidden within the right map that is presented.

Sources and References

The sources provided do have a bit of range when it comes to correlating themselves to the topic at hand. They are all correlated with either correcting the article as a whole or trying to improve it by adding their own sense of information. Based on that fact, the recording articles that they chose are fairly diverse and come from the college so are there for well-represented secondary sources.

Organization

Even though there are only bullet points provided, the organization provided with those points are very clean and punctual so referencing them is not a difficult task. The sources gathered do indeed correlate to a specific part of the article and with that give detailed and legitimate sources to back up their idea that they feel contributes to that certain part of the paragraph.

Images and Media

N/A

Overall Impression

Overall I am a little confused as to why this specific rough draft isn't as flushed out as I thought it would be however the percentage points are good for the main article. I feel like there could have been a lot more structure and flushed out additions with the article body so that the source is provided could have had a more comprehensive approach in terms of a outside viewpoint