User talk:Crystal ceecee/sandbox

Peer Review There isn’t a lead paragraph. Elements in the Themes paragraph could be used as an opener for the whole thing. Key points as I see them: •Definition •Theme •History •Benefits •Criticism. There is a quite a bit of info and the proposal covers what needs to be added. Some of the paragraphs are sourced in wiki format, some sourced in other formats, and others have no citations at all. Focused on new public service. Sources are scholarly, citations need to be put in wiki format. I wouldn’t ask questions in the article, focus on facts. Take out opinions, focus on facts. Too much on new public management, summarize it. Criticism paragraph sounds more like an opinion than actual criticisms. Distinctions are clearly made between NPS and NPM. Not all claims are supported. The article has plenty of references, however not all of them are cited. Denhardt is the main source. The Wikipedia format of citing is used a little bit. The entry has some spelling and grammar errors. Structure is clear, and the article is clearly focused. Randzeo (talk) 04:19, 24 April 2015 (UTC)