User:Fuchs190/Ammonium/Hjnelson02 Peer Review

General info
Fuchs190
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Fuchs190/Ammonium?veaction=edit&preload=Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Ammonium

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.)

The lead has been updated to reflect the new content. It also includes a lead statement that describes the articles topic. It includes a description of the major sections of the article and is concise. All information in the lead is present in the rest of the article.

The content added is relevant and up to date. The edits added information that was not previously present in the article. Before only talked about ammonia and urea but now includes other biological reactions with urea. The content added was neutron and did not have any heavy biases. Viewpoints are good and they do not attempt to persuade the reader.

The information is all backed up with reliable sources and the information written accurately reflects what was added to the sandbox. The sources are thorough and current. Most of the articles are from primary peer reviewed articles. Though in the references section, some of the dates for the articles are missing. They need to be entered like this (13 March 2018) for example. The links work.

The content added is well written and doesn't have spelling and grammatical errors. The content added also also well organized.

No images were added. You can also include links to other Wikipedia pages that go more in depth with the terms used in the article.