User talk:Jamieturner11/International adoption

Peer Evaluation
The Lead reflects the new content added in but lacks an introductory sentence and conciseness. I don't see much content added to the draft compared to the original article. It does address equity issues but this already comes from the original article. All content in the article appears neutral and unbiased. Yet again no content seems to have been added other than references to support points already given in the article. These sources back up the content that is said in the article, but it needs to be accompanied with more information present. There are also no images in the draft, but if some are added they could support the information the article is giving and make it more appealing. the secondary sources that have been added to the article have managed to improve it and give it more content to learn from. More information needs to be added within the article so these sources can be expressed more however, and whoever is reading it can get a full understanding of the topic. I'd suggest to put any new content in bold so it's easier to see and analyze. ChrisL915 (talk) 22:28, 3 December 2023 (UTC)