User:Yessel Garcia/Rent control in the United States/Seanapplegate Peer Review

Peer review

This is where you will complete your peer review exercise. Please use the following template to fill out your review.

General info

• Whose work are you reviewing? Yessel Garcia
• Link to draft you're reviewing:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Yessel%20Garcia/Rent_control_in_the_United_States/Bibliography?preload=Template%3ADashboard.wikiedu.org_bibliography

Content

Guiding questions:

• Is the content added relevant to the topic? Yes.
• Is the content added up-to-date? Yes.
• Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? No.
• Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics? Most definitely. Specifically with the topic of redlining.

Content evaluation

The content added is relevant and only adds to fully contextualize the topic. Very useful.

Tone and Balance

Guiding questions:

• Is the content added neutral? Yes.
• Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? No.
• Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? No.
• Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? No.

Tone and balance evaluation

The added content conveys a neutral perspective, and only adds on to topics that were not fully explored.

Sources and References

Guiding questions:

• Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Yes.
• Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? Yes.
• Are the sources current? Yes, within 5 years of writing.
• Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible? Yes.
• Check a few links. Do they work? Yes.

Sources and references evaluation

The sources inform a relevant and current set of information, despite it detailing an extensive history.

Organization

Guiding questions:

• Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? Yes.
• Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors? No.
• Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Yes.

Organization evaluation

The added content fits well within the section that it was placed. Although, since Berkeley is mentioned in the middle of the paragraph, and the older version brings it up in the end, it might be useful to account for this and remove it from the original.

Overall impressions

Guiding questions:

• Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete? Yes.
• What are the strengths of the content added? The article now incorporates specific and relevant issues.
• How can the content added be improved? It may benefit from looking at how the added content flows within the present version. Specifically when transitioning to the closing sentences.

Overall evaluation

The added content paints a better picture of the topic, and incorporates relevant and current sources to do so.