User:CaitlynOwen/Anne George (biologist)/Stellur Peer Review

General info
CaitlynOwen
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing:User:CaitlynOwen/Anne George (biologist)/Bibliography
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists):Anne George (biologist)

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.)

Hi Caitlyn! Here's my peer review for you,

Lead


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer? - A new lead has not been added to reflect new changes, it looks like you assigned this article to yourself but worked on another article.

Content


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic? - No as no new information was added to this article. In the user edits for the article, I did not see any new changes/additions highlighted. It seems that all the information in the article currently are from the the original article as there was no note on what's been added or edited.
 * Is the content added up-to-date? - No the existing content seems to cover information on Anne George's work up till her postdoctoral in 1993 but does not include any of her recent works or accomplishments from the 2000s.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? - This article could definitely use some subsections that divides Anna George's life into her early life, work after her PhD, as well as her current research and patents in tissue biology. More content on what Anna George's research is on and what work she has contributed to could be expanded.
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics? - Yes it does you are addressing women which are a highly underrepresented area

Tone and Balance


 * Is the content added neutral? - For the most part yes, there is no expression of bias in any of the word choice. All sentences do not show any insertions.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?: As this article is on a female scientists who are underrepresented in the field of science, maybe more information in regards to Anne George's hardships in a field dominated by men could be added, or information on the different views of science in India vs. the US, as she seemed to do her early degress in India before completing her PhD in the US.

Sources and References


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? - No there is a lack of reliable sources . Only one source was put in the references, however this was not cited in the paragraph. There needs to be in-line citation after most of the sentences. For example, "Dr. Anne George is a Professor of Oral Biology at the University of Illinois at Chicago College of Dentistry and holds the Allan G. Brodie Endowed Professorship, and she also is an adjunct professor in the Department of Cell and Anatomy and the Department of Engineering at the University of Illinois Medical School." This needs a citation to know where the information is from.


 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? /Is at least one of them a source from class reading or the "suggested sources" list? If not, can you think of anything we've read that might be useful for them? There is only one source in the article, though this reference seems to be reliable as it comes from well known scientific literature.
 * Are the sources current? - Yes the source is from 2008 which is relatively current
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible? No, there is only one source and it seems to come from a male author.
 * Are there better sources available, such as peer-reviewed articles in place of news coverage or random websites? (You may need to do some digging to answer this.) - I don't think so, there don't seem to be many articles of even news articles on Anne George. Finding peer-reviewed articles on her will be difficult.

Organization


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? Yes it easy to read, however the content can definitely be split into subsections based on different time points of Anne George's life.
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors? Here are some segments that I think could use fixing, just my suggestions:

- "Dr. Anne George is a Professor of Oral Biology at the University of Illinois at Chicago College of Dentistry and holds the Allan G. Brodie Endowed Professorship, and she also is an adjunct professor in the Department of Cell and Anatomy and the Department of Engineering at the University of Illinois Medical School." After professorship, instead of a comma, it should be a period.

- "George is a leading researcher on the subject of identification and characterization of acidic proteins involved in dentin mineralization." This sentence is a but unclear and could be rephrased to George is a leading researcher on identifying and characterizing acidic proteins involved in dentin mineralization.

- "She holds a patent on fibrous protein fusions and use thereof in the formation of advanced organic/inorganic composite materials." The sentence sounds a little weird, maybe if it was rephrased to she holds a patent on fibrous protein fusions and their use in formation..


 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? - No its not broken down into sections/general headings. Its one big paragraph.

Overall impressions


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete?/How can the content added be improved? - Not really, it seems you just assigned the article to yourself and may have forgotten to unadd it when working on another article.
 * What are the strengths of the content added? I can't really speak on the strengths as there was no new content or sources added to the original article.

Additional Questions


 * Does your peer have 5-7 reliable sources? No, they have only 1 source. The article could definitely use more reliable sources.
 * Does the topic link in some way to our course material? Yes, Anne George is a biologist and researcher on characterization of acidic proteins, which relates to our cell biology course.
 * Does your peer add historical context to their article? No there was no historical context added. The original article already had some historical information on Anne George's life.
 * Based on what you know from course content, what do you think Wikipedia users should know about this topic? In other words, what would you recommend adding and/or considering further? This article needs more sources and in-line citations added. More information on Anne George's current work and where she is now. More information about the research she is specialized in.

-Shreya