User:Hcikim/Sylvia Speller/HYang2024 Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Hcikim


 * Link to draft you're reviewing

User:Hcikim/Sylvia Speller


 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)

Doesn't yet exist on English wiki -- German: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sylvia_Speller



Evaluate the drafted changes
"Overall, great job on your draft so far -- it is definitely challenging to tackle a topic that is brand new to Wikipedia! Your writing definitely matches Wikipedia's stylistic requirements, and it's great that your team has chosen to research a woman in STEM. At the time of my review, your article is still relatively incomplete, so most of my comments are limited to the content that has been added so far, but I think you have a good start and good luck as you continue to work on it!"

Lead
Your lead is well-written and informative, containing many key details about Sylvia Speller. The writing is clear, concise, and neutral. However, at the moment, your lead doesn't convey much information about why Sylvia Speller is notable. Upon a Google Search, I find that her research interests "concern the understanding and controlling of processes on the nanoscale and the development of scanning probe microscopy methods for complex systems and environments" (maybe worth explaining what these things are/mean and what Speller's contributions were) and that "she coordinated research programmes on Advanced Scanning Probe Microscopy and acted as director of NanoLab Nijmegen, a programme dedicated to knowledge transfer between academia and industry in the field of nanoscience and technology" (this also seems like it would add to Speller's notability and might be a section worth adding).

At the moment, the lead does not contain a summary of the other sections that will appear in the article -- but I think this may be because the lead + article are both relatively incomplete.

Content
The content is not very complete yet, so I don't have any particularly substantial concerns about the content. It is definitely relevant to Speller and up to date, and I believe this was a "Women in Red" article so the content does help with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps by discussing a woman in STEM. At the same time, more specific information about Speller's contributions to her field have not been added, so her notability is not yet clear.

Tone and Balance
The content that has been added so far is definitely neutral and unbiased; there are no specific points of view regarding Speller or her work that have been represented so far as the content is purely biographical.

Sources and References
All of the links provided work; the information about Speller comes primarily from university websites/her curriculum vitae, which should be a trustworthy and up-to-date source. However, one area to expand may be to include a section on her specific contributions to surface and interface physics, nanophysics, and scanning probe methods: this may cite literature reviews on these topics that mention her (or perhaps draw from research papers she has written on these topics). Thus, at the moment, the content of the article does not reflect the available literature on Speller.

This website appears to have Speller's most cited publications: https://publons.com/researcher/2862290/sylvia-speller/. While citing Speller's own articles is not the highest quality source, it could be useful for summarizing some of the key insights she developed.

Organization
The content that has been added so far is concise and clear, and free from grammatical or spelling errors.

Small changes I might make to improve flow of writing, but not technically incorrect:


 * Un-capitalize "Physics" when describing her course of study under Education
 * Remove the colon before listing her postdoc/scientific assistant positions (eg, "at TU Eindhoven in the Netherlands, University of Osnabruck, and finally the University of Leuven in Belgium")
 * "is currently a professor in the faculty of mathematics and natural sciences at the University of Rostock since 2012" → "has been a professor in the faculty of mathematics and natural sciences at the University of Rostock since 2012"

Otherwise, the content is well-organized and the sections that have been added so far make sense.

Images and Media
As of right now, no images have been added. A picture of Speller would definitely be helpful to add! In addition, if any diagrams would be useful for depicting her research, that could be worth including as well.

For New Articles Only
At the moment, the article does not appear to meet Wikipedia's Notability requirements. Currently, only 4 sources have been used. Finding sources such as book chapters or literature reviews that cite or depend upon Speller's work might help to demonstrate why Speller's contributions to physics are notable.

The article does follow the formatting patterns of similar biographical articles; in addition to expanding upon her Education and Teaching Areas, some biographical articles will make note of a person's personal life or provide additional historical context for a person's notability. In this case, a more extensive list of Speller's publications might be useful (and perhaps instead of a cited list, some explanation of the contents of her publications would be useful to Wikipedia readers).

The article does link to other articles for discoverability. Personally, I felt that some of the links (EX: two links to 'Netherlands' in one paragraph) were not necessary.