User:Bsien002/Microgravity Bioprinting/Whatischemistry Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Bsien002


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * Microgravity bioprinting - Wikipedia

Evaluate the drafted changes
Lead


 * The lead concisely describes the topic and has a brief description of the article's major section. It doesn't have any details not present in the article.

Content


 * The author added a recent history of the topic as well as the applications and advantages.
 * There isn't content that doesn't belong.
 * The content is well-written and easy to read.
 * The content is broken down into sections that reflect the major point.

Tone and Balance


 * The content added is neutral, and they do reflect what the sources say.

Sources and References


 * The article meet's Wikipedia's notability requirement as it is supported by more than 2 reliable sources.
 * The list of sources is pretty large. The links work for the sources.

Organization


 * I don't understand why the last header reads impact. I feel like there may be a phrase or another word that can better describe the section about advantages of zero gravity on bioprinting. The article has links to other articles to make it more discoverable, but I feel that there requires more links.

Overall impressions

~
 * I feel that the work is pretty comprehensive because it goes over the history, advantages, and applications.