User talk:Jojohanson/sandbox

Peer Review

Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you? Everything is relevant to the topic. I would look over word choice to insure that there is not bias language.

Is the article neutral? Are there any claims, or frames, that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? Words like definitely and since should be avoid to make claims more neutral. Try to rework the last two paragraphs to make view puts clear.

Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? Both are present, but try to separate them.

Check the citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article? Yes, Yes, and yes.

Is each fact supported by an appropriate, reliable reference? Where does the information come from? Are these neutral sources? If biased, is that bias noted? Putting in citations where they should be would make it easier to follow. Look for scholarly articles and .edu cites for creditability.

Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that should be added? Try to refrain from sources before 2013 to keep the information most relevant. If you can find something that is in interview that might be interesting to add. (Emmiheath04 (talk) 18:20, 1 April 2019 (UTC))