User:AFakeDrummer/Diol/Tritium123 Peer Review

General info
User:AFakeDrummer
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing:Diol - Wikipedia
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists):User:AFakeDrummer/Diol - Wikipedia

Evaluate the drafted changes
Lead

- The lead has bee updated but I think it might be nice to include a brief mention of the 1,3 diols, longer diols and polymer synthesis. The lead does mention some examples of 1,3 and 1,4 diols but i think including a sentence or two would help the reader know what the article body body sections are about.

- I like the starting sentence and how it gets right to the point

- Maybe mention somewhere that ethylene glycol is the most common diol in the body but i don't know if that's 100% necessary. Other then that there is nothing that is not mentioned already.

Content

- All the content is relevant, up to date, and there are a variety of different authors represented in the references.

- The reaction section seems more bare then the other sections. Maybe you could add some more reactions or expand the exiting ones. You could try to do this by adding reaction mechanism or explain why/where these reaction might be use.

- The synthesis and classes of diols is really well done and i think it paints a good picture of the basics of diols

Tone and Balance

- The tone is neutral and does not push a bias on the reader. There is a variety of different authors referenced in the article.

Sources and Refences

- you have a lot of references including lot that are precisely cited in the text

- Ref #: 11, 8 links didn't work for me

- Ref 7 is behind a paywall and it would be hard for regular viewers to access it

- There are some references from websites that seem slightly sketchy from a quick glance and the information might not be a reliable source. You also have a lot of textbook and literature sources which is great

Organization

- I can't find any spelling or grammatical errors

- I like the flow of the article and think it works well

- the image placement is a little jarring and it might help for the images at the end to be within the boarders of the text

Images and Media

- I like the added images and captions

- The captions on the reactions could use more descriptions in the caption like saying what the reagents are and what type of reaction it is

Overall Impression - I think the things you added (especially the images), helped improve the article.

- The increased references added to the credibility and improved the article

- One thing to improve with the added content is to add more detail to the caption.

- You could also add some more to bulk up the reaction section so that it is more on par with the synthesis and classes section

- I think the people looking at the article are university students that are learning the basics of organic chemistry and i think the way that it is written is understandable to them

Thank you for the review! I have added some better references, more reactions in certain parts, and attempted to keep the tone as neutral as possible. I have also changed the references that you mentioned and fixed the images so that it's not as jarring as before! I added a little bit more detail to some images but kept it as simple as possible for people to just understand the simple process

Thanks again! AFakeDrummer (talk) 06:09, 15 April 2024 (UTC)