User:Diarcane/Nanochemistry/Jrumscheidt Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

(provide username)


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)

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.)

Lead


 * Good introduction overall; gives good overview of what nanochemistry is, its origins, the principles behind it and some key examples
 * Definitely easier to read and more concise than the original wiki article
 * Good use a very short description of what nanomaterials is or what nanoscience is just for some extra information/clarification

Content


 * Overall, seems good; seems to address the content gaps from the original article and does so in a balanced way (not focusing on one section too much)
 * For nanothermodynamics section, could include some more information on the empirical and mathematical models used to assess the nanothermodynamics; possibly through a figure
 * Added some interesting applications
 * Could always include additional, less important applications at the end of the section without full explanations (just one or two sections to give a more comprehensive list of applications)
 * For the “developing countries” section may be better to find a phrase than developing countries as they isnt a universally agreed upon definition for “developing country” or a clear distinction which countries fit into the category (reference that includes the term is from 2010; may be outdated not sure)
 * Content seems up to date and relevant to the article’s topic

Tone and Balance


 * Overall, tone seems pretty neutral and isn’t trying to persuade the reader to have a certain opinion about nanochemistry
 * Again, only suggestion here is to think about the wording for ‘developing countries’ just to stay more neutral and objective

Sources and References


 * Lots of references from a variety of authors from different sub-disciplines/research focuses within nanochemistry and nanoscience
 * Most seem up to date and from peer-reviewed, reputable journals
 * Links work!

Organization


 * Clear organization with lead section introducing what is discussed in the article nicely
 * Writing is concise, pretty easy to read and understand

Images and Media


 * Could use more images especially in the applications section and to illustrate the different structures of nanomaterials common in nanochemistry
 * Article overall has nof figures so definitely could use some

Overall Impressions


 * Overall, it seems good!
 * Could just use more figures and finishing up the application section