User:Gpp105io/Commercial sexual exploitation of children/Yessel Garcia 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? (provide username) Isabelle Osorio
• Link to draft you're reviewing: User:Isabelleosorio/Commercial sexual exploitation of children

Content

Guiding questions:

• Is the content added relevant to the topic?
  • yes
• Is the content added up-to-date?
  • the most recent source used was 2012 which isn't super up to date
• Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
  • some sections seem a bit short, such as the subsection "Prostitution"
• Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?
  • no but maybe you could include which communities have been shown to be more at risk?

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?
  • the subsection under "types" seem much smaller than the other sections in the article
• Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
  • no

Sources and References

Guiding questions:

• Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
  • I believe so but perhaps you should use the reuse options for citations overtime you reference the site not just once
• Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
  • I think the article lacks examples but in doing so it also allows the article to be neutral
• Are the sources current?
  • the most current sources is 2012 which isn't super recent
• Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
  • not exactly but the sources used seem to be scholarly and unbiased
• Check a few links. Do they work?
  • for the most part yes but there are some citation errors in your number 3 source

Organization

Guiding questions:

• Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
  • yes, the article is much more concise
• 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

Overall impressions

Guiding questions:

• Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete?
  • I believes that the content added made the article more concise and digestible but I think some sections could benefit from a bit more information
• What are the strengths of the content added?
  • I really liked that you added links to other wiki pages that could help better understand the content
• How can the content added be improved?
  • perhaps just add and reuse the citation/link throughout the article whenever you mention the source instead of just citing it once. (you can just do this by clicking "cite" and then click "reuse" in the pop up and then you can choose which source to cite again)