User talk:Cmoon27/Chicana/o studies

Peer Review

Jack's Peer Review: I think these are really helpful additions to the article, because beforehand I thought this section was really confusing and out-of-place. The writing really succinctly describes the two varying schools of thought, and the additions are very well-sourced. Additionally, the additions strike a great balance between posing the two schools of thought in an opposing manner while remaining unbiased (in other words, the additions are neutral but the varying schools still contrast one another). The only thing that I think would improve the additions is if there were more sources, to ensure that your additions are balanced and encompass the overall subject. However, this is also a problem I am encountering as someone who is editing the same article. Overall though I think these are really great additions to the article because it clarifies a confusing aspect of the article, your language is concise, and your sentences are well-cited.

Ross's Peer Review: Your content is very thorough, informative, and straight forward-- all the things Wikipedia is looking for. My only concern is that you cited the a couple articles several times throughout the section like source [1]. I think its important to have several sources from which you get information if you are writing such a fundamental part of the article. The content doesn't need to be changed, but I think adding more sources to support your sentences could strengthen your article and make it appear more neutral, or all inclusive. Looking at the Chicano/a page on Wikipedia, the section your editing is very clearly underdeveloped, so I think continuing to build up the ideologies section will add a lot to the article.

Peer Review Response

I agree with my peers' review of my contributions. I agree that I need to add more sources for my contributions. I will work on adding more sources for my contributions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cmoon27 (talk • contribs) 16:11, 4 December 2019 (UTC)