User:Floralepe/Biological carbon fixation/NadiaEfon Peer Review

Some of the references reflect the content being analyzed. However, some of the references like reference 3 and 5 are not very accessible. The content that was added is neutral and does not appear to be biased or centered towards a particular claim.

General info
Floralepe
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


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

Evaluate the drafted change
The lead was really catchy, and clearly describes the articles topic and caught my interest in the first sentence. Also like that your introductory statement was brief but detailed enough. I think the content included was relevant, like the different pathways involved in carbon fixation. Also like that you included some of the micro-organisms involved in these pathways.

I also like the organization of the article, and the figures used were quite relevant in explaining the net carbon fixation present in different ecosystems. Like the neutral tone used in the article.

Some of the references reflect the content being analyzed. However, some of the references like reference 3 and 5 are not very accessible. The content that was added is neutral and does not appear to be biased or centered towards a particular claim.