User talk:Jmylaughter/Children's hospice
Peer Review (Kweku)[edit]
Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you?
- To me, everything within the article was relevant to the topic of hospice care
Is the article neutral? Are there any claims, or frames, that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
- I think overall the article was neutral. However, it did to seem to have a tone of favorability toward children’s hospice, when I’m sure that there are some critiques of the system. In particular, the first paragraph after the bullet points in the “Services” section read as a bit biased.
Is each fact supported by an appropriate, reliable reference? Where does the information come from? Are these neutral sources? If biased, is that bias noted? Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that should be added?
- Generally the sources seem reputable and recent for the most part. The part I mentioned above that doesn’t have a citation should be revisited.
Kgd916 (talk) 01:20, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
- Peer Review (Natan)
- Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you?
- Yes, everything is relevant and related to children’s hospice. It flowed nicely from services provided, US children’s hospices, and then other countries children hospices. Nice to see how other countries are compared to the US
- Is the article neutral? Are there any claims, or frames, that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
- I felt like the first paragraph of United States children’s hospices seemed a bit biased and language heavy towards physicians. However, the rest of the article seemed neutral. Maybe a discussion (if possible), about how children feel towards these decisions? For those that are old enough, of course.
- Is each fact supported by an appropriate, reliable reference? Where does the information come from? Are these neutral sources? If biased, is that bias noted? Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that should be added?
- Yes, facts are supported by a reference, except in one spot where it’s noted as “citation needed”. References seem reliable, from both journals and national websites. However, some references are a bit old so it would be nice to see if any newer references mention anything different.
- Ilovesushi16 (talk) 01:49, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Peer Review (Alyssa)[edit]
Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you? I think everything is relevant to the topic of children's hospice
Is the article neutral? Are there any claims, or frames, that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
The article is overall neutral. There may be some language that puts hospice into good light ("helping families and friends approach death with dignity and peace"), although that may not always be the case.
Is each fact supported by an appropriate, reliable reference? Where does the information come from? Are these neutral sources? If biased, is that bias noted? Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that should be added?
The facts are supported by references except for one spot under references. Most references are from reputable websites and articles. The sources from the website may be website.