User:Approximately90/Marburg virus/Slolamingsnailmail Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Approximately90 and HermiaStudy


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Approximately90/Marburg_virus?veaction=edit&preload=Template%3ADashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Marburg virus

Evaluate the drafted changes
- This edit is to the prevention section, which is a great choice as the prevention section has the least amount of information of the sections on the article. This section is also very outdated and is not recent in regards to the information provided, so it was a good section to choose to edit.

Content

-This edit is extremely relevant and helpful as it adds a lot of information which the article is lacking. The edit provides much more recent information as the original article lacks current developments regarding the Marburg vaccine. The edit brings in information from 2022, making it both very relevant and recent.

Tone and balance

-The points brought up in the edit are clear, balanced, unbiased, and helpful in the development of the article and its closing sections. The ideas of new vaccine and their efficacy along with the obstacle with which each treatment faces was equally represented. I also enjoyed the sentence that highlighted the similarities between Marburg virus and Ebola virus as they belong to the same family: Filoviridae. This was helpful information as they are trying to create a vaccine that works for both and greatly adds to the information of the article.

Sources and References

-Most of the sources appear to be recent and the statements made in the edit were well cited throughout each paragraph. Each of the citations to the links work well and give a clear route to help the reader better understand the material in the article. The authors do a good job to reference recent studies from 2022, greatly adding to the recentness of the article.

Organization

-The article contains recent and accurate information that is backed up by a reasonable number of sources, all of which have working citations. Some of the phrasing could be more concise or benefit from terminology that is more official.

Images and Media

-No images or media were added by this edit. If wanted, an image could be added in regards to trial studies done in guinea pigs, for example. Though, I do not think a picture would necessarily help the overall content of the article.

New Articles

-This is an edit and not the draft of a new article.

Overall impression

-This edit could benefit from more concise verbiage and less blanket terminology, the content itself is extremely relevant and brings good information to the article. The edit does a good job to add to the recentness of the work and if helpful in showing the need for a vaccine today.