User:Honeybee15/Homelessness in the United States/Dalanlaughlin 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) Honeybee15 (Jillian Perez)
• Link to draft you're reviewing: User:Honeybee15/sandbox

Lead

Guiding questions:

• Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer? No
• Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Yes
• Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? Somewhat
• Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? Yes
• Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? Overly detailed

Lead evaluation

I think that in terms of your additions I would just make sure that your contributions are broadly reflected in the lead section. There are a lot of problems with the lead but atleast adding your overview would be really helpful!

Content

Guiding questions:

• Is the content added relevant to the topic? Yes
• Is the content added up-to-date? Yes
• Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? No

Content evaluation

I think the content you added is really strong as well as the edits you made. It brings good organization and insight into the two overarching sections you have worked on. I would add more information to the health section if you can as well as make sure the sentences in each transition nicely.

Tone and Balance

Guiding questions:

• Is the content added neutral? Somewhat
• Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? Maybe, unless they are factual...
• 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? Perhaps

Tone and balance evaluation

"Housing itself is a powerful social determinate of health" -> is this for facts or its this just a lot of people's opinions?

"Addressing homeless health is difficult to do in a traditional health care setting due to the complex nature of their needs and the multitude of health consequences they face " -> avoid bias, unless this is factual

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? I think so.
• Are the sources current? Yes, except one is from 2012-2013
• Check a few links. Do they work? Yes

Sources and references evaluation

"Addressing homeless health is difficult to do in a traditional health care setting due to the complex nature of their needs and the multitude of health consequences they face (O’Toole, 2016)." -> if you added this sentence, make sure to properly source!

" homelessness at the same time (Center for Housing and Health website)." -> fix

"Model (HCH Model)." -> fix

I think the choices in your sources are good though!

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? Like 1
• Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Yes

Organization evaluation

"The Housing First approach" -> should approach be capitalized ? if so, make sure follows everywhere.

"Chicago, Illinois in the the Better Health" -> two the's...

"Tailored Care approach" -> capitalized approach or no in sub-section heading and work?

"Each HCH project is federally funded and works as federally qualified health centers that work in the intersection of multiple disciplines." -> repetition of work

Images and Media

Guiding questions: If your peer added images or media

• Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
• Are images well-captioned?
• Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
• Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?

For New Articles Only

If the draft you're reviewing is a new article, consider the following in addition to the above.

• Does the article meet Wikipedia's Notability requirements - i.e. Is the article supported by 2-3 reliable secondary sources independent of the subject?
• How exhaustive is the list of sources? Does it accurately represent all available literature on the subject?
• Does the article follow the patterns of other similar articles - i.e. contain any necessary infoboxes, section headings, and any other features contained within similar articles?
• Does the article link to other articles so it is more discoverable?

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? more insight, greater organizational structure, specific examples
• How can the content added be improved? More insight into the first section "Effects of Homelessness"

Overall evaluation

I think you did a great job! You helped a lot with organization in the effects section but could be nice to get more insight if you can based on your research. The sector under your "Efforts" section is really good particularly. I felt I learned a lot and it was super clear.