User:JHer359/Mitosome/Ortiz.carolina Peer Review

General info
JHer359
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing:User:JHer359/Mitosome
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists):Mitosome

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Yes, the text includes it.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * Yes, it is divided into three sections.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * Yes, in general.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * It is a good text, it is not very detailed nor very general.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Yes it is. provides interesting and relevant information.
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * Yes.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * N/A
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * Yes
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * No
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * No
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * No

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Yes, in general. Has several references.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Yes
 * Are the sources current?
 * Yes
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Yes, in general.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * No.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * Yes, it is a very organized and structured article.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * No, the article does not have images.
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * It is a good article with detailed information.
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * Use multiple references:
 * How can the article be improved?
 * N/A
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * It is a well developed article.