User talk:Jbstone09

Welcome!
Hello, Jbstone09, and welcome to Wikipedia! My name is Ian and I work with Wiki Education; I help support students who are editing as part of a class assignment.

I hope you enjoy editing here. If you haven't already done so, please check out the student training library, which introduces you to editing and Wikipedia's core principles. You may also want to check out the Teahouse, a community of Wikipedia editors dedicated to helping new users. Below are some resources to help you get started editing. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 15:36, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

Peer Review
Lead: It has been updated to reflect the new content added by you. The lead has also had an introductory sentence that does concisely and clearly describes the article's topic. As far as I can tell, it does contain the major sections that will be talked about in the rest of the article. It does encompass all the major topics in the article that was put as a major topic. The lead does not include information that was not present in the article. The lead is concise and does not go into detail heavily and you have removed the parts that were repeated even though it was said before.

Content: The content that was kept does have content that is relevant to the topic and was a major topic that was said in the lead of the article. The content that was left alone is relevant to the topic since it does seem a little bit biased if the court cases were to be included. It does seem a bit off if it was included in your draft since we are thought to be unbiased. The content is up to date, though when reading the original article, it does seem to be missing the reason as to why the prayer beads are necessary to use during prayers. I would suggest including the reason why there are prayer beads in Dhikr. I understand why you would not include the court cases that were there since even though it does, address the topics related when it comes to the historically underrepresented topics, it does seem a bit biased if you kept them in your draft. It is about prayer about a religion that does not have a good view in the US.

Tone and Balance: The content that was added is neutral in tone and does not necessarily have a positive or negative view when I was reading your draft. It seemed like I read it from a book that was about this topic, and it seems like you have done your research to prevent the biases from coming out. There are no claims that appear to be heavily biased to a position when it comes to part that you changed, it all seems to have the same amount of research done for it. There are also no viewpoints that seemed to be overrepresented or underrepresented, they all have the same amount of significance. You did really well not to favor one position over another or even persuade any audience to turn away from another position. MicahDMillan (talk) 22:06, 29 October 2021 (UTC)