User talk:Averyw1086/sandbox

Avery's Peer Review for Vaccination Policy article

• The lead is good at giving a brief definition of what vaccination policy is. I think the lead could be better if it mentions briefly the history of vaccinations, vaccinations during war, and competing sentiments about vaccinations.

• The structure of the article seems to flow well.

• Some countries' sections seem significantly shorter than others. Also some countries sections seem too large in themselves. I feel the dissenting viewpoints of the anti-vaccinators are not mentioned but should be. I do not think the author tries to persuade the reader in the way the article is written.

• Given the section of Evaluating Vaccination Policy, I feel I could guess the authors perspective. There are no phrases or words that are obviously biased. The article does not seem to make claims on behalf of unnamed people or groups. There seems to be more space, if not the entire article, devoted too much to positive information.

• Most statements are connected to reliable sources, however some sources cannot be found by hyper-link. Also, there are statements that require needed citations. The war section of the article attributes only one source to the entire section which could lends itself to only a single point of view. There are a couple of statements that are un-sourced and require citations. The vaccine-preventable diseases statement may be inaccurate due to the source of the statement (under Immunity and Herd Immunity section). Also that statement conflicts with the data found here: https://medlineplus.gov/ency/article/001915.htm

• The article describes various nation's vaccination policies well, as well as gives information about the goals and benefits of vaccinations. I would suggest adding reliable sources to those statements that need them and correct inaccurate statements. These are improvements because they add to the credibility of the article. The cost-benefit analysis of vaccination could be applicable to my article given the nature of what it means to benefit a population, which can be related to utilitarian ethics.

Identifying what your classmate does well:

He did well to add/correct references to statements that required them as well as adding content to the article itself. He also significantly contributed to the improvement of the China section of the article.

Suggested changes to the article:

Add to the war section of the article with an example of vaccination policy from a different war, and also add other references to the Spanish-American war section so that it is not based entirely on one source. Adding an image to the schools section would seem to benefit the overall look of the page in my opinion.

Most important improvement:

The most important thing as of now would be to find sources and correct inaccurate statements.Swiernicki (talk) 20:17, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

Averyw1086 (talk) 19:15, 9 April 2019 (UTC) Response to Swiernicki's Peer Review Thank you for the input! I will definitely take your suggestions into consideration. I will try to add in some vaccination history into the lead, but I am going to leave out competing viewpoints of vaccination because this page is about vaccination policy rather than vaccination itself, and those viewpoints are on the vaccination wiki page. I will definitely look into the sources that do not have a a hyperlink, or need proper citations. I will look for more information on how vaccination policy affected different wars.