User:Yessel Garcia/Rent regulation/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_regulation/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, very.
• 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.

Content evaluation

The added content, as an entirely new section, creates a contextualized and structural perspective on the topic. It addresses relevant history as well.

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

While some may view this as a controversial topic, it presents the information neutrally. Be careful with the use of the word "capitalist", though.

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.
• Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible? Yes, with each source being from a different author.
• Check a few links. Do they work? Yes.

Sources and references evaluation

The sources are used a substantial amount throughout the section, and incorporate an array of marginalized perspectives as well. Good job!

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 is well suited to this new section. I am curious to see where it might go in the article.

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 added does well to address equity gaps, and the incorporation of a new section is a substantial improvement for that.
• How can the content added be improved? Potentially incorporating examples of social rights in rent regulation--either in current day or throughout the relevant history.

Overall evaluation

This new section reads as a necessary and useful addition to the article. It might be useful to explore the possibility of placing this information in the contemporary context of COVID-19.