User talk:Sywarren/Women in Egypt

Gus' Peer Review
Overall Impression:

I like that you are expanding on the topics of sexual violence against women. After reading through the original article on Wikipedia, I think there definitely needs to be more information on these topics. I especially like that you hope to include women's own responses to the enactment of conservative policies, and I like that you plan on gathering general public opinion data on these policies as well. I think it gives the reader more of an important perspective on how women are reacting to policies that are shaping their lives. A couple of things I would hope to see you expand a bit more on are feminism in Egypt and how that relates to the rights and struggles presently have. It would be nice to see this related to women's roles in the political and economic spheres in Egypt. One idea that came to mind was to explore these roles before and after the 2011 Egyptian revolution. I think you have solid ideas and are on the right track.

Specifics

In regard to tone, I think you successfully come across as a neutral author presenting the facts of the topic. I think this article would benefit from expanding into other dimensions of women in Egypt besides (sexual) violence against women. The additions you have already made is very well written, and I think the organization of the article is intuitive and makes sense. I would also make sure to find some citations for some of claims made in the original article!

I found this article search link from the library in case you wanted to look more into the things I mentioned above: https://search.library.berkeley.edu/permalink/01UCS_BER/s4lks2/cdi_scopus_primary_629461117. I think it may be helpful on its own and as a starting point for further research. Aguerrero427 (talk) 22:21, 4 April 2022 (UTC)Gus

Kulsoom's Peer Review
Overall, I appreciate the coherence and detail of your article edit draft and how you used your sandbox to elaborate upon why you would like to make the edits you intend on adding. The edits you plan on making, such as incorporating more information about Egypt's personal status law that took effect in 2021 or about sexual violence and harassment in the country, also bear a large amount of significance to the topic of Women in Egypt and are very timely and relevant to the sociopolitical landscape of Egypt today. The idea to make a more clearly defined timeline of crucial moments for women's rights in Egypt is a brilliant idea that I am looking forward to seeing being executed on the overall published article. As your sandbox draft primarily outlines what you intend on writing and does not have too much writing on the topic for me to review yet, I will refrain on commenting on writing style, neutrality, structure, balance of coverage, and so forth for the time being. However, it is advisable you consider these components and take them into account while writing your article edit.

General Feedback:


 * 1) One beneficial aspect of this article edit draft is how it lays out plans for developing the additions of subtopics that will be very beneficial for understanding the main topic of women in Egypt.
 * 2) There is room for further development in making sure to incorporate sources of academic and scholastic origin, in addition to using the journalistic articles listed in the references section because the information published on Wikipedia should be based upon a variety of different sources.
 * 3) The authors already have a good idea of what can be edited to improve the quality of the existing article by updating it with modern information and sorting chronological defining events into a coherent timeline on the page.
 * 4) The article edits have not been entirely written yet, but the structure of the outline looks good.
 * 5) As an author of the North and sub-Saharan African relations page, the topic of women in Egypt and their treatment during the revolution is something that bears sociopolitical significance to my own writing.
 * 6) I personally would love to know more about the participation of women in the economic sphere of Egypt and how they make up the workforce, control purchasing and spending power in households, and generally participate in the Egyptian economy.

Kate's Peer Review
What does the article do well? Is there anything from your review that impressed you? This could be information, writing, etc. that you think your classmate should not change and/or should expand on. ''The article does a great job of updating users on current events. They focus on events happening after 2021, which is when the material in the article runs out. This is an excellent approach and I am sure the article will be great after more is added to it.'' Where do you see room for improvement or further development? Make sure to explain why these changes would improve the article. ''The only thing I could see being improved is the amount of content. Of course, this is only a rough draft so more content will be added later on. Maybe diversifying the content a little would be nice too (ie: talk about cases/laws other than the acting workshop).'' What's the most important thing the authors could do to improve the article? This is a fantastic rough draft, the "Overall" of what they plan to do is promising and will contribute a lot to the article. Is the article well-organized? Does the structure make sense? Yes, it is well organized and the structure makes sense. Did you notice anything about the article you reviewed that could be applicable to your own article? Let them know! Unfortunately, we are working on different countries. As a reader, what else would you like to know about this topic? [Of course, this information may not be readily available in all cases, but it can help generate interesting directions for their research] Some other laws/cases could be cool to hear about but material already present is substantial.

A clear structure: are the entry’s sections clearly organized? Does the structure make sense? ''Yes! Very clear.'' Balanced coverage: is the article balanced in terms of its coverage? For example, do any sections receive insufficient weight given their importance? Does anything seem unnecessary? Is there anything obviously missing? ''Yes, it is balanced. Not much content added yet but what is there is well-balanced.'' Neutral content: is the content conveyed in a neutral tone? A neutral article should not make claims on behalf of unnamed groups (e.g. “some people say”) or present information in value-laden ways (e.g. “Most people think” or “Some insist that”) ''Yes, it is neutral. Maybe remove "famous" as the descriptive for actor — could be subjective.'' Reliable sources: look at the reference section, are the sources reliable? Does the entry rely too heavily on one or two sources? Is any key claim in the entry missing a citation? ''Yes, sources are reliable journalistic sources. There are no academic sources but this is just a rough draft.''

Ps146a (talk) 04:07, 3 April 2022 (UTC)


 * Tabitha's Peer Review
 * The article does well in giving up to date information on happening things in Egypt. It does well in creating a subheading that explores the clear timelines of defining moments in women's rights. This article is also specific in identifying where the old article requires improvement. The most impressive thing about this article is that it explains what happened before and after this gives a clear and concise understanding of the articles.This will enable reader to have more up to date information concerning the topic. In order to improve the article more details about the events will be necessary being that this is a rough draft, I am excited to see the final results of the article. I noticed so many things that I could apply to my article for example the structure. For example the structure of giving clear timeline being different countries I will be using the structure of clearly defined timeline to improve my article.The sections of the article receive sufficient weight given their importance and there are no unnecessary additions. The sources are very good and I am generally excited to see the results of this article. Tabitha Adeleke (talk) 04:38, 4 April 2022 (UTC)