User talk:MOHAMMMED ABBAS/Second Sudanese Civil War

Angelina's Peer Review
Hi!

I really like the organization of your article! The structure is really clear and the lead concisely explains what you want to cover. I think everything you want to add seems perfect, especially seeking out more clear dates and finding more Sudanese sources. I think your contributions will definitely add value to this article.

I don't have much constructive feedback other than I like what you have planned and I'm excited to see it develop!

Angelinaespinoza (talk) 20:20, 31 March 2022 (UTC)

Mark's response
Hi Angelina, thanks for reviewing our article! I'm glad we're on the right path.

Nathan's Peer Review
General Feedback: 1.	In terms of what the article does well, the article presents its data/research well; more specifically, the issue of child soldiers in the Second Sudanese Civil War is important and should be expanded on and explained in further detail. In addition, I was impressed by the clearly defined structure and organized body of the review. 2.	In terms of where I see room for improvement or further development, I think the article needs to be developed further with more research and analysis on the specific topic. In addition, I think the article should include multiple perspectives regarding the various areas of concern in the review. I think these changes would improve the article because they would give the article more depth and a more thorough, unbiased analysis and report of the Second Sudanese Civil War. 3.	The most important thing the authors could do to improve the article is to obtain a plethora of sources since this topic of war has various perspectives and belligerents, which need to be sufficiently addressed and explained. 4.	The article is well-organized. The structure makes sense. 5.	I noticed that your article’s well-structured and clear organization could be applicable to my own article. 6.	As a reader, I would like to know more about the effects of the war on international actors and how the war has changed the lives of the child soldiers. Feedback Addressing the Various Component Parts of a Wikipedia Entry: 1.	The lead section is concise and easy to understand. It quickly gets to the main idea and evenly addresses the topic and its importance clearly for the reader. 2.	The review has a clear structure and its entry’s sections are clearly organized. The structure makes sense. 3.	The article is balanced in terms of its coverage. At the moment, no sections receive insufficient weight given their importance. Nothing seems unnecessary. Nothing is obviously missing. 4.	At this point, the content is conveyed in a neutral tone. The article does not make claims on behalf of unnamed groups or present information in value-laden ways. 5.	The sources are reliable. The entry does not rely too heavily on or two sources. There are no key claims in the entry that are missing a citation. CalUser777 (talk) 02:24, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

Mark's response
Hi Nathan, thanks for reviewing our article! I appreciate how detailed it is!