User:BunBun007/Kinin/A very nice name Peer Review

General info
BunBun007
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kinin&diff=prev&oldid=1188613448
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Kinin:
 * Kinin:

Evaluate the drafted changes
The leading paragraph serves as a good brief description of the topic. However, it seems like the leading section contains information the article body does not reflect on, for example "Kallikreins activate kinins when stimulated" is mentioned in the leading section but there is no more elaborations in the body. Additionally, the leading section also lacks some topics that are described in the article body (e.g. kinin receptors). However, these problems already exist before the addition made by BunBun007.

The tone of the article appears neutral, and there is no concern about representation of point of view in this topic.

In term of sources, the only problem I discovered is that I cannot open the 8th source in the reference, the url is archived. This is not a link provided by BunBun007. The sources used by BunBun007 are all up to date. However, it seems like a primary source (original lab report) is being used here: "Kinin receptors in skin wound healing."

The addition of content is well written, it also balanced the amount of attention to B1 and B2 receptors.

I do feel like the article is more complete after the addition by BunBun007, and everything is clear and well-written. Maybe this article can be improved if the primary source is dropped. It might be the case that BunBun007 gathered the information from a secondary resource cited in the lab report's abstract/introduction, and if that is the case BunBun007 can easily fix this by referencing the secondary resource cited in the report.