User:Ajaslay/Prenatal stress/Pleighs Peer Review
Peer review
Complete your peer review exercise below, providing as much constructive criticism as possible. The more detailed suggestions you provide, the more useful it will be to your classmate. Make sure you consider each of the following aspects: LeadGuiding questions:
ContentGuiding questions:
Tone and BalanceGuiding questions:
Sources and ReferencesGuiding questions:
OrganizationGuiding questions:
Images and MediaGuiding questions: If your peer added images or media
For New Articles OnlyIf the draft you're reviewing is for a new article, consider the following in addition to the above.
Overall impressionsGuiding questions:
Examples of good feedbackA good article evaluation can take a number of forms. The most essential things are to clearly identify the biggest shortcomings, and provide specific guidance on how the article can be improved.
Additional ResourcesCheck out the Editing Wikipedia PDF for general editing tips and suggestions. |
General info[edit]
- Whose work are you reviewing?
pleighs
- Link to draft you're reviewing
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Ajaslay/Prenatal_stress?veaction=edit&preload=Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template
- Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
- Prenatal stress
Evaluate the drafted changes[edit]
Lead: I like the changes that were made to the leading paragraph. I would either take out the sentence about mental illness or add more information beyond that one sentence, because mental illness during pregnancy and prenatal stress aren't necessarily synonymous. Good job being concise and information. I would suggest referencing more of the body paragraphs (such as sexual dimorphism) into the intro paragraph.
Content: I like the paragraph you have decided to add. For the grammar of the first sentence of your "impact on development" paragraph, I think cognitive and social match the sentence structure better than cognitively and socially. I like how you tied in ethical concerns. I am interested to see where you place this paragraph among the others. I think the published article, as a whole, could use better flow between sections.
Tone and Balance: Good job remaining neutral and unbiased.
Sources and References: References look good.
Organization: Content is well written. As mentioned above published article could use some reworking/reorganization. Article has several stand alone sentences that could be developed into stronger, more voluminous paragraphs.
Images and Media: No images or media used. Adding some images may help enhance the article.
Overall Impression: Edits are looking good overall. Published article could use some strengthening in areas mentioned above.