User:Chemistry Pink Lady/Carolyn R. Bertozzi/Guacamole21 Peer Review

Peer review
This is where you will complete your peer review exercise. Please use the following template to fill out your review.

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing? Guacamole21
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: User:Chemistry Pink Lady/Carolyn R. Bertozzi

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer? The lead has the new content.
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Yes
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? Yes
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? No
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? The lead is concise and not overly detailed.

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic? The content added was relevant to the topic.
 * Is the content added up-to-date? The content added is up-to-date.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? The article is missing publications of Carolyn.

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral? The content is neutral.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? The claims are not biased.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? There is no misrepresentation occurring.
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? No

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Yes
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? Yes
 * Are the sources current? Yes
 * Check a few links. Do they work? Yes

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? The content was clear, concise, and easy to read.
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors? I only noticed the issue with the A.B in the Life and Career section. I would recommend that you fact check that. Also, you can always double check the article for grammar and spelling errors.
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? I like how the article is organized. I would recommend adding a references section.

Images and Media
Guiding questions: If your peer added images or media


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? There are no images or media.
 * Are images well-captioned? There are no images or media.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? There are no images or media.
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? There are no images or media.

For New Articles Only
If the draft you're reviewing is a new article, consider the following in addition to the above.


 * Does the article meet Wikipedia's Notability requirements - i.e. Is the article supported by 2-3 reliable secondary sources independent of the subject? This is not a new article.
 * How exhaustive is the list of sources? Does it accurately represent all available literature on the subject? This is not a new article.
 * Does the article follow the patterns of other similar articles - i.e. contain any necessary infoboxes, section headings, and any other features contained within similar articles? This is not a new article.
 * Does the article link to other articles so it is more discoverable? This is not a new article.

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete? The content added helped improve the overall quality of the article. Great job!
 * What are the strengths of the content added? I like the strong lead that the article has because it is concise and to the point of why she is important. There is a bibliography box at the top of the page. There is a formatting issue with it, but I love that there is one. I like the external video the external video.
 * How can the content added be improved? There is a bibliography box at the top of the page. I do not know if this is a formatting issue or not, but I think that the article should have this box on the top right side of the page. It should include a photo of Carolyn R. Bertozzi. There are two content boxes or sections. I recommend that the article just includes one of these instead of two. I would recommend that an editor fact checks that she got an A.B. in chemistry. I have never heard anyone getting an A.B.. I think it is suppose to be B.A. I just want to make sure that it is correct. I would recommend that the editor adds significant papers, books, and publications. This section is currently blank and needs some support to make it complete. I would recommend that the editor adds a bibliography or reference section so that the reader can easily access the citations. I like the external video, but I would recommend that the editor integrates it into the research section of the article. Also, the addition of photos of her research or relating to her research would help make this article complete. I love where this article is heading. I would recommend that the editor reviews the grammar and structure of the article to ensure that it is the best that it can be.

Overall evaluation
You are doing a great job!!! Keep up the hard work!