User:Daytontalbot/Wolfe cycle/KBMICR23 Peer Review

General info
(Daytontalbot)
 * Whose work are you reviewing?

N/A
 * Link to draft you're reviewing:User:Daytontalbot/Wolfe cycle
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer?
 * The lead heading hasn't been added, but the information added thus far follows the introductory sentence.
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * There is only one paragraph at this time, but the introductory sentence is concise and clearly describes the rest.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * see above
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * see above
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * see above

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic?
 * Yes, the content currently available is relevant.
 * Is the content added up-to-date?
 * As far as I can tell, based off of the resources provided, yes.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * Their is only one section, with no other headings other than References. I would recommend adding the headings and expanding on the content as a whole. I think it would be really helpful to add a diagram showing the cycle, and expand on what methanogenesis is, the archaea that use it, when and who discovered this cycle, etc. - Great start though!
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?
 * N/A

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral?
 * Yes
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * nope, but this is all from the previous authors. I'd love to re-evaluate when there is more added.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * nope!
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * Nope!

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * technically, no. The sources are primary, but that's ok. Dr. Crook said primary sources are okay for our class.
 * Does the content accurately reflect what the cited sources say? (You'll need to refer to the sources to check this.)
 * yes
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * yes
 * Are the sources current?
 * Yes - 2 of the 3. One is from 2012, and if able, try to find one that is updated (but not a big deal if not possible)
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * yes, the links work well.

Organization

 * N/A

Images and Media

 * N/A