User:Ccustodi/Grignard reaction/Dorsanil Peer Review

General info
Ccustodi
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:Ccustodi/Grignard reaction
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Grignard reaction

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.)

The lead has not been updated to reflect the newly added content. The introductory sentence on the lead clearly describes the article's topic. The lead does not include a brief description of the major sections of the article. There is no irrelevant information in the lead; it is missing information about main points of the article.

The content added is relevant to the topic and is up-to-date. There is no missing or unnecessary content. The article does not deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps and does not address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics.

The content added is neutral. There are no claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position. No viewpoint is overrepresented or underrepresented. The content does not attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another.

The new content is backed up by reliable secondary sources of information. The content accurately reflects what the cited sources say. The sources are thorough and reflect the available literature on the topic. Most of the sources are almost current; however, for this topic, the sources do not necessarily need to be very up-to-date. There are sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors. They do not include historically marginalized individuals. The sources used are credible, and many are from peer-reviewed articles. The checked links work.

The added content is well-written; it is concise, clear, and easy to read. The content does not have any grammatical or spelling errors. It is broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic.

No images and media were added. The draft does mention that reaction schemes are to be added later.

The added content overall improves the quality of the article and makes it more complete. The strength of the content added is that it plans to include images and schemes that have clear explanations provided at the bottom of each, enhancing understandability for readers. Further, although the topic covered is complicated as it is organic chemistry, the added content is simple and efficient, making it easy for readers to understand. The content can be improved by providing a more detailed lead section to cover all the main points of the article.