User:Zraerobertson/Participatory democracy/Monikolov Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Zraerobertson


 * Link to draft you're reviewing: User:Zraerobertson/Participatory democracy
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists): Participatory democracy
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists): Participatory democracy

Evaluate the drafted changes
The article draft is extremely strong, including a variety of reputable sources and well-organized information. However, there are sometimes small instances in which I would advise you to be careful about maintaining a neutral tone. For example, towards the beginning of the "21st Century" section of the article, you use the phrasing, "Participatory democracy has grown in notoriety." I would be careful about making the judgement that something is notorious. Unless you can provide empirical evidence of the growing notoriety of participatory democracy or a source that backs up this reference, I would encourage you against making this claim yourself. Moreover, in your "Mechanisms for participatory democracy" section, you state, "Scholars have recently considered several mechanisms ... ." I believe that the general phrasing of this statement seems kind of vague and sort of hints at the importance of new mechanisms, when your job is mainly to be neutral while presenting these points. Maybe you could specify the scholars that considered these mechanisms to clarify your point.

In addition, there are parts of your article in which I think you could add some information if you would like to. For example, within your "21st Century" section, you mention the Ireland Constitutional Convention. It could be worth mentioning that Ireland didn't just hold this convention right away. The "We the Citizens" pilot study came first in 2011, and the 2016-2018 Citizens' Assembly came after.

Overall, I think all the edits you made were relevant and significant. Great job, and I look forward to reading your revisions later!