User:Eliseforget/Veterinary anesthesia/Cara.begley Peer Review

Lead:

This lead looks very good. The additional information added in the fist sentence is a great set up and provides information that is necessary to understanding the entire subject. The original article did not have information on what the purpose for anesthesia is, and this author adds this in. The Lead lays out the sections clearly without getting into too much information, and I like how there is an concise view before going deep into the information. It could be interesting to explore how anesthesia affects different species of animal, but this could be more in the content section. Overall this is fantastic.

Content:

This content is all relevant to the topic, and the added content seems to be the most recent information on veterinary anesthesia. There is no obvious missing content and the content section is very well done. I really like how each drug is explained and applied to what situation it would be used in. The sources are appropriately placed in this section. Splitting up the "Levels of Sedation" section could be a good idea to make it a bit more readable, but other than that it looks great. I do like how the information was set up in the original article in relation of how anesthesia would be used in each species, and that could potentially be incorporated.

Tone/Balance:

All the added content is neutral. The tone is unbiased and clearly explains the medical and chemical basis of all the drugs without any clear bias or any claims that unfairly highlight one position. The content does not persuade and really only works to inform. Very well done.

Sources/Resources:

The new content is more or less entirely backed up by sources. I think that the "Levels of Sedation" section could use some sources interspersed. It seems to be a solid paragraph of information, but adding more sources could make the information more reliable. The sources are up to date and reflect the information.

Organization:

Content is well written and very organized. There are no grammar or spelling errors.

Overall content is great. Really nice work.

General info
(provide username)
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing:
 * 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.)