User talk:Armanduysal/Petroleum politics

Peer Review 2
A. Neutral Voice


 * 1) Strong neutral voice: "This corruption is caused by the greed of national officials and oil companies run by the government"
 * 2) Could use improvement of neutral voice on majority of the section. "so crucial to life", "petroleum politics matters", know how essential", these phrases sound like opinionated claims.

B.


 * 1) I wouldn't suggest anything close of plagiarism since your whole section is missing the in text citations. I would recommend adding those in text citations in order to get to the point of addressing close paraphrasing or plagiarism.

C. Readability


 * 1) Strong sentence: "In recent years alternative fuel sources have been getting more attention because of climate change and the push for renewable energy" (just needs a source)
 * 2) Needs improvement: The wording of this whole section comes off as opinionated claims, especially without any citations. There is nothing wrong with claims but have evidence or try not to list so many "caused", "because", "leads to" type of sentences in a row.

D. Rubric

As mentioned above the addition is missing in text citations that connect to your references. Also mentioned above, the tonality of the sections can be improved. Some things to consider including: where does this section belong? is this information worthy of a new section or should it be added as an extension to the Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, and Nigeria sections since they already exist.

E.


 * 1) Strengths: The topics and information is a valuable addition to the article
 * 2) Improvements: Add citations, improve writing as a whole, the section feels like a run on sentence, or overwhelming with claims.
 * 3) Additional Notes: I'm sorry I couldn't have been a little more helpful with the "improve writing" comments, hopefully Dr. Sneegas will notice the same improvements and be able to help more than I can.

Maxwynn (talk) 01:36, 10 March 2024 (UTC)