User:Cstaheli/DNA polymerase/Mkalarobinson Peer Review

General info

 * Cstaheli
 * DNA polymerase

Lead evaluation
I know that the lead isn't the main focus of your contribution, but there are some parts that I feel could be improved. The sentence "These enzymes catalyze the chemical reaction" might be improved by specifying what enzymes. Also many of the statements are uncited. There are references listed but they are all clumped together after one sentence making it hard to see what information came from what source.

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic?
 * Is the content added up-to-date?
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?

Tone and balance evaluation
Tone and Balance are good throughout the article.

Sources and references evaluation
Information is sourced and the source link works.

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?

Organization evaluation
Content is well organized.

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


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?

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?
 * How exhaustive is the list of sources? Does it accurately represent all available literature on the subject?
 * 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?
 * Does the article link to other articles so it is more discoverable?

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete?
 * What are the strengths of the content added?
 * How can the content added be improved?

Overall evaluation
I am impressed with your choice to work on this article. The content you have added is very good. I would suggest listing who made the discovery of the three additional DNA polymerases. If you decide that working outside of the history section is something you would like to do, the lead could use a little work with the sourcing and sentence structure. Other than that everything looks good! Best of luck!