User:Yessel Garcia/Rent regulation/Michelleho1100 Peer Review

Note: I wasn't able to assign myself the sandbox with Yessel's new content because it was added to a bibliography sandbox. The peer review below is for the Bibliography Sandbox for Rent regulation.

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: User:Yessel Garcia/Rent regulation/Bibliography

Content

Guiding questions:

• Is the content added relevant to the topic? Yes.
• Is the content added up-to-date? Yes, most sources are from within the last 10 years.
• 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? It briefly talks about how people of color historically face issues with gentrification.

Content evaluation

The content added is relevant to the discussion of rent regulation.

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 new section added is written neutrally and does not try to sway readers into taking a position on the topic.

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?
• Are the sources current? Yes.
• 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 are current and seem to be from people who are experts on this topic such as Bruce Mitchell.

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? I think the content added is fitting for the new section of "social rights."

Organization evaluation

The content added is relevant and added to an appropriate new section titled "social rights."

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 content gives a strong background on the history of rent regulation and why rent regulation is so closely tied to social rights.
• How can the content added be improved? I think the content added is very useful in understanding rent regulation. The only thing I would change is to break up the text into smaller paragraphs so that it is easier to read. For instance, I would add a new paragraph at the sentence starting with "However gentrification increases property values..."

Overall evaluation

Overall, I think the new section added is very useful for understanding current debates and arguments regarding rent regulation. I appreciate the historic background added as well.