User:Ejgclemson/Integral membrane protein/Willow44 Peer Review

General info
Ejgclemon
 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Peer review
 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * Integral membrane protein
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Integral membrane protein

Complete your peer review exercise below, providing as much constructive criticism as possible. The more detailed suggestions you provide, the more useful it will be to your classmate. Make sure you consider each of the following aspects:

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer?
 * No, my peer added an entire new section about extraction which is not reflected in the lead
 * 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?
 * No, could be improved by hiring at the major sections in article to provide readers with a roadmap.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * No
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * Very concise. Overall, well written and provides just enough detail.

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic?
 * Yes - he provided information about some roadblocks scientists may run into while studying integral membrane proteins.
 * Is the content added up-to-date?
 * Yes
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * No
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?
 * No focuses on scientific topics.

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral?
 * Yes provides only factual, backed up information
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * No
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * No
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * No, content is informative not persuasive.

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Yes but an entire paragraph was written and there was only one source provided for the entire thing.
 * Does the content accurately reflect what the cited sources say? (You'll need to refer to the sources to check this.)
 * Yes went to source and confirmed
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Information provided was from a journal article about transmembrane protein extraction of breast and ovarian cancer cells so it is important to find information backing backing up this information in a more generalized sense.
 * Are the sources current?
 * Yes - published in 2018
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * The source came from 3 authors, however I couldn't find any information about their background (ie. male or female etc.)
 * Are there better sources available, such as peer-reviewed articles in place of news coverage or random websites? (You may need to do some digging to answer this.)
 * No, this is a peer reviewed article, however as stated before, it might be better to find an article that has a more broad understanding of the topic being discussed.
 * 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?
 * Yes very concise and presented in a well organized, easy to read fashion
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * No spelling errors
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * Yes well organized but not broken down into sections because only one section was added.

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete?
 * Yes it discusses challenges involved in studying this particular topic.
 * What are the strengths of the content added?
 * Relates added content (challenges of studying integral membrane proteins) to the structure of integral membrane proteins and their properties that is discussed earlier in the article.
 * How can the content added be improved?
 * Include more diverse sources, and a photo showing experiments related to extraction of integral membrane proteins and the challenges faced would be helpful to include with the information added.