User talk:Nick Amato/Mass media in Zambia

The information in the sandbox looks great! Tayyy123 (talk) 19:51, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

I'm also done with my peer review!Tayyy123 (talk) 19:52, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Taylor's Peer Review
They are editing an existing article. They are editing the entire article.

Feedback: The content added has improved the quality of the article. The lead section is well-written and it gives a good overview of the topic. Additionally, I like the different sections. However, I would add more citations to the lead section. I would also edit the article for clarity. The most important edit would be to add more information to each section. Overall, I think the article is well-organized and headed in the right direction.

Lead Section: The Lead includes an introductory sentence that clearly describes the article's topic. It includes a brief description of the article's major sections. It only includes information present in the article. The lead is concise.

Clear Structure: I like the different sections. The structure makes sense. However, you should add more information to each section.

Balanced Coverage: The content is relevant to the topic. The content is up to date. The article deals with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps, as there is limited information on many African countries. However, the content could be edited to be more concise.

Neutral Content: The content is neutral. The claims are not biased.

Reliable Sources: Most facts are backed up by citations, although the lead section could use more citations. The sources are current. The sources are written by different authors. There is one peer-reviewed source, but you should add more. The links in the references section work.

Other: The article does not include images.

Tayyy123 (talk) 20:11, 30 March 2022 (UTC)


 * Thank you, Taylor, for the feedback. We will take these points into considerations and make the proper adjustments to ensure that our article looks more presentable and organized. We appreciate and value your input! Nick Amato (talk) 23:10, 9 April 2022 (UTC)

Katie's Peer Review
Great topic and draft! The sections on social media and radio in Zambia were all pertinent to your topic on mass media in Zambia, and I liked how you added a diverse array of information to help make the article sound neutral.

However, I would also like to see new sections that focus more on other types of mass media in addition to more specific examples of what type of an impact the increase in social media access had on either Zambia's culture, politics, environment, or other aspects of society. The same goes for your section on broadened radio access for Zambians. Additionally, before delving straight into the section on social media, it would be nice to see a lead section that can briefly describe what the article will be about along with some images to visually engage with readers. Overall, everything looks great, including the citations and the content that you have added to the article.

Leekatie212 (talk) 01:00, 4 April 2022 (UTC)


 * Thank you, Katie, for the feedback! We will take these helpful pointers into consideration as we move forward with our article. We will try to enhance the flow of information, as well as broaden the range of topics involved with Mass Media. We appreciate and value your input. Nick Amato (talk) 23:14, 9 April 2022 (UTC)