User:CFB1019/Developmental Origins of Health and Disease/Shermanmccarthy Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Teecuee, Jocedye, Octhrift, Mjteague34, Lsmoses, Syeda22af, Alexcrocker12345, Blazer GB


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:CFB1019/Developmental_Origins_of_Health_and_Disease?veaction=edit&preload=Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template


 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Developmental Origins of Health and Disease

Evaluate the drafted changes
(Compose a detailed peer review here, considering each of the key aspects listed above if it is relevant. Consider the guiding questions, and check out the examples of what feedback looks like.)

Lead: There is a mention of "environmental causes to influence disease risk across generations" in the article (although, it doesn't look like someone from our class wrote that) and there is no supporting evidence that I noticed found on the page. Additionally, the lead mentions that "the psychopathology of the fetus can also be predicted by epigenetic factors," but there is no supporting evidence that I noticed.

Content:

The data added to the page is relevant to the topic, although, some of the sources and studies included are old, although this does not inherently make the data useless, updates resources would be beneficial. Additionally, there does not appear to be information added regarding an equity gap.

Tone and balance:

The tone and balance in your wiki seems neutral and does not try to over/under represent any specific point.

Sources and References:

Your sources are excellent, the only change I can think of is adding additional information to the source 3-5. It looks like wikipedia is requesting additional information.

Organization:

The organization of your wikipedia page is clear and concise for what is there. Your team was given an article without a lot of information so I understand you're designing it as you go and you're doing well!

Images and Media:

There doesn't seem to be any photos or media yet.

Overall, everything in the article is relevant to your subject and not distracting. The article is neutral, your citations are good sources and every link works. There isn't any information that is outdated, and it seems like you guys are making an effort to include brand new sources.