User:Aly Ross/Cell suspension/Abnerndabad Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Aly Ross


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Aly_Ross/Cell_suspension&oldid=1053436636
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cell_suspension&oldid=1053348315

Evaluate the drafted changes
Consider the following structure, drawing from your notes:


 * 1) First, what does the article do well? Is there anything from your review that impressed you? Any turn of phrase that described the subject in a clear way?
 * 2) Great overview! I like the details for spinner, shaker, and subculturing.
 * 3) What changes would you suggest the author apply to the article? Why would those changes be an improvement?
 * 4) Shorten the history. Are there any other types of cell culture maintenances that you did not detail, but feel like they should be listed
 * 5) What's the most important thing the author could do to improve the article?
 * 6) Read over to remain neutral and reduce wording
 * 7) Did you notice anything about the article you reviewed that could be applicable to your own article? Let them know!
 * 8) Lots of pics, I will look into incorporating pics into my article.

Lead:

- You probably already know this but: When moving to article, remember that Lead goes at the top before the article body


 * Looking at the lead by itself, do I feel satisfied that I know the importance of the topic?
 * Yes
 * Looking at the lead again after reading the rest of the article, does the lead reflect the most important information?
 * Yes
 * Does the lead give more weight to certain parts of the article over others? Is anything missing? Is anything redundant?
 * Not sure if the third sentence is necessary

Structure:

Ask yourself:


 * Are the sections organized well, in a sensible order? Would they make more sense presented some other way (chronologically, for example)?
 * Great organization of section. I like the final list of different suspension cell lines.

Coverage:


 * Is each section's length equal to its importance to the article's subject? Are there sections in the article that seem unnecessary? Is anything off-topic?
 * I like the history section, but not sure of its significance to the article and may be much longer considering its important. It address immortality of cells which is more pertaining to cell lines
 * Do you think its possible to separate "Commercial applications of suspension cell culture" into a new section. I don't see its correlation to Methods and maintenance
 * Does the article reflect all the perspectives represented in the published literature? Are any significant viewpoints left out or missing?
 * Does the article draw conclusions or try to convince the reader to accept one particular point of view?
 * No, seems neutral, however, I would say you are focussing a lot on cell suspension in lab scale, but cell suspension at bioreactor scale should also be noted to appear more neutral.

Content:


 * Do you think you could guess the perspective of the author by reading the article?
 * check last comment from above^
 * Are there any words or phrases that don't feel neutral? For example, "the best idea," "most people," or negative associations, such as "While it's obvious that x, some insist that y."
 * I'd recommend rereading over, and making sure you don't do this
 * " However, there are far fewer mammalian suspension cell lines than mammalian adhesive cell lines, limiting the scope of research involving suspension cell lines"
 * This is a conclusion you came to, not really true in my opinion.
 * Does the article make claims on behalf of unnamed groups or people? For example, "some people say..."
 * Does the article focus too much on negative or positive information? Remember, neutral doesn't mean "the best positive light" or "the worst, most critical light." It means a clear reflection of various aspects of a topic.

Reliable Sources:


 * Are most statements in the article connected to a reliable source, such as textbooks and journal articles? Or do they rely on blogs or self-published authors?
 * Lots of Reliable sources, not sure we Sigma Aldrich is considered a neutral source.
 * Are there a lot of statements attributed to one or two sources? If so, it may lead to an unbalanced article, or one that leans too heavily into a single point of view.
 * No, it appears diverse and balanced.

Others:


 * "The media must be allowed to stir, but cannot disturb the cells too much and cause them excessive stress"
 * Try rewording?
 * Does cell suspension = suspension culture?