 | Peer review
Complete your peer review exercise below, providing as much constructive criticism as possible. The more detailed suggestions you provide, the more useful it will be to your classmate. Make sure you consider each of the following aspects: LeadGuiding questions:
ContentGuiding questions:
Tone and BalanceGuiding questions:
Sources and ReferencesGuiding questions:
OrganizationGuiding questions:
Images and MediaGuiding questions: If your peer added images or media
For New Articles OnlyIf the draft you're reviewing is for a new article, consider the following in addition to the above.
Overall impressionsGuiding questions:
Examples of good feedbackA good article evaluation can take a number of forms. The most essential things are to clearly identify the biggest shortcomings, and provide specific guidance on how the article can be improved.
Additional Resources |
- Whose work are you reviewing?
Potato feets
- Link to draft you're reviewing
- User:Potatofeets/CubaâEthiopia relations
- Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
- CubaâEthiopia relations
(Compose a detailed peer review here, considering each of the key aspects listed above if it is relevant. Consider the guiding questions, and check out the examples of what feedback looks like.)
I thought this article did a great job at providing a neutral stance. It provided a good summary of the war between Ethiopia and Somalia and the reasons for Cuba's involvement in the war and lasting relationship between the two countries. One thing to improve the draft could be making the section about the Soviet Union and Cuba a bit longer to match the length of the History section. Or, you could also break up the History section, since the last two paragraphs focus on the present state of the relationship of the two countries. You could create a new section titled "Present" or something, so that those two paragraphs fit more nicely under the title. A lead section that summarizes your article could also be something to add that would help the reader better understand what the article aims to explain.
| Peer review
Complete your peer review exercise below, providing as much constructive criticism as possible. The more detailed suggestions you provide, the more useful it will be to your classmate. Make sure you consider each of the following aspects: LeadGuiding questions:
ContentGuiding questions:
Tone and BalanceGuiding questions:
Sources and ReferencesGuiding questions:
OrganizationGuiding questions:
Images and MediaGuiding questions: If your peer added images or media
For New Articles OnlyIf the draft you're reviewing is for a new article, consider the following in addition to the above.
Overall impressionsGuiding questions:
Examples of good feedbackA good article evaluation can take a number of forms. The most essential things are to clearly identify the biggest shortcomings, and provide specific guidance on how the article can be improved.
Additional Resources |
- Whose work are you reviewing?
Potato feets
- Link to draft you're reviewing
- User:Potatofeets/CubaâEthiopia relations
- Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
- CubaâEthiopia relations
(Compose a detailed peer review here, considering each of the key aspects listed above if it is relevant. Consider the guiding questions, and check out the examples of what feedback looks like.)
I thought this article did a great job at providing a neutral stance. It provided a good summary of the war between Ethiopia and Somalia and the reasons for Cuba's involvement in the war and lasting relationship between the two countries. One thing to improve the draft could be making the section about the Soviet Union and Cuba a bit longer to match the length of the History section. Or, you could also break up the History section, since the last two paragraphs focus on the present state of the relationship of the two countries. You could create a new section titled "Present" or something, so that those two paragraphs fit more nicely under the title. A lead section that summarizes your article could also be something to add that would help the reader better understand what the article aims to explain.