User:Bigspace4/Electrochemical cell/BigChem Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Bigspace4


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Bigspace4/Electrochemical_cell?veaction=edit&preload=Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template


 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Electrochemical cell

Evaluate the drafted changes
The lead has been improved in some ways but is diminished in others. While the concept of a galvanic cell is introduced well, and an overview of it is given, and even the concept of the battery is introduced better in the revision than in the original article, it seems to me that the glaring omission is the electrolytic cell which is not mentioned at all. The lead suffers from being too concise in my opinion. The structure could be improved, but the tone was appropriate.

The content added is relevant to the topic of the article and is well curated and fits within the framework of the original content very well. The editor has taken a lot of care in expounding on the seemingly more complex and nuanced statements within the original article, and a greater clarity is achieved through this explanation. Some foundational and definitional concepts are explained, which adds to ease of readability but are over done sometimes, such as when the concept of an electrolyte is explained.

The overall tone is extremely neutral and very appropriate to the topic at hand, as is expected of the scientific nature of the article. The organization is also very good, on some occasions the editor has made use of bullet points, which increases understanding immensely.

The images added also do a great deal to improve the article. For instance the image of the modern electrolytic cell greatly adds to the article, although I think the 19th century cell could be removed without removing anything from the article at all.

The citations all worked. They were all appropriate for the most part, except for the one from ChemLibreTexts which isn’t a primary source!

Overall the revisions were good. I would suggest reworking the lead paragraph to include a gist of the rest of the article. I would also suggest shortening some paragraphs by removing definitions and foundational concepts that one could look up by a hyperlink instead.

Response to Reviewers' Comments

Thank you for considering my wiki article, “Electrochemical Cell,” and providing thoughtful feedback. Below are your comments, and my responses.

Reviewer (BigChem):


 * 1) Strength lead by adding electrolytic cell, and briefly outlining all sections of the article

Thank you for the suggestion. I’ve added a few sentences now mentioning all subheading topics, including electrolytic cells.

2. Simplify concept of an electrolyte

Thank you, I agree the concept of an electrolyte should be simple, or hyperlinked. However, in the electrolytic cell section, which I think is what you’re referring to, I think it’s necessary to describe it as a component. In all other instances, I’ve simplified explanations to hyperlinks.

3. Remove 19th century electrolytic photo

I agree. For the purposes of keep this electrochemical page modern, I don’t think removing the nineteenth century photo detracts from the content of the page, or that section. I’ve removed it.

4. Improve chemlibretext citation

Thank you for catching that. I’ve appropriately updated that citation.

5. Shorten paragraphs by using hyperlinks

Thank you for the suggestion. I agree, hyperlinks are effective in shortening paragraphs. But, I think there's a balance between helping the reader, and forcing them to visit another page to grasp something quick. I’ve gone through all the paragraphs and hyperlinked what I think is appropriate.

Bidspace4 ~ 03:36, 18 April 2023 (UTC)