User:Acharymn/India 3D printing/SophisticatedStick Peer Review

General info
Acharymn
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing:User:Acharymn/India 3D printing
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists):

Evaluate the drafted changes

 * The frequency of the citations are very good. I got interested in the subject even without knowing anything about it prior. It is very concise.
 * "India has no rule or regulations on operating 3D printing technology." change rule to rules. "There is unclarity on how copyright acts will work on 3D printing design since there are no 3D printing copyright law." in the 3D policy section change 'law.' to 'laws.' for grammar. Also add a period to the last sentence of the 3D policy section. And "India has over 1000 domestic 3D printing companies valuing $100 million." in the industrial changes section change 1000 to 1,000. In the history section add a 'the' before 'Imaginarium company'. In the Industrial Changes section 'India's medical industry are using 3D printing technology to make products like organs and tissue to help doctors with studies and training.' change 'are' to 'is'.
 * I think having 1 or 2 examples to people around the world trying to print weapons would be good info maybe. Adding links to other wikipedia articles to the text would also be great (highlight and ctrl+k) such as 3D printing, or important people, or anything else that maybe someone would want to know more about.
 * I could probably add citations more frequently in my article.

Article Lead Section

 * I think starting the article by saying that 3d printing is a growing industry or something like that would be good and would have the most important info there, and then follow that with the history section. Adding parts from different section into the lead might help.

Structure

 * The sections are in a good order and I like that it starts with the history.
 * Maybe adding something about efforts to make laws for 3D printing would lengthen the 3D policies section, if there are any. Or if any people in the government have said anything about 3D printing laws or policies. Nothing is off-topic which is good.
 * Yes. There are no significant viewpoints from the sources that are missing.
 * The article is neutral.

Neutral Content
Reliable Sources
 * Both good sides (medical technology) and bad sides (lack of laws for weapon printing) are shown so I think the perspective is pretty neutral.
 * I didn't see any unneutral phrases.
 * The first paragraph of the industrial changes section has "India aims to create..." or "India has predicted...". They should more specifically have whoever said those like "the Indian government" or "the people of India" or whoever said it.
 * I think it's a good balance of negatives and positives.


 * There were plenty of journals as well as a few blogs. I think overall it doesn't rely too heavily on blogs. Although that 3d house printing website is definitely trying to sell 3d house printing.
 * I don't think it relies too heavily on any single source, the most cited one is the blog post for 2, 3, 4, and 8 but it doesn't take up too many statements.
 * There weren't any unsourced statements and I could find the relevant information in the sources.

Reviewer Reflection


 * Based on this review I plan on citing more frequently, seeing if I can edit the beginning section of the existing article I'm doing, and cross-referencing my sources if possible.