User:JazChapman/Malachite/JacquelineB3 Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Jaz Chapman


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

Lead
I thought the lead overall did a good job in concisely explaining the topic, however it didn't really mention all the sections that are included in the article. I think the lead is short and concise, however it could benefit by briefly mentioning the sections that make up the article to give the reader a better grasp of the topic.

Content
I thought the content of the article was good. All of the content in the existing page was relevant and well explained, and I thought the added content would make a great addition to it. The chemisty of malachite is something that was missing in the existing article, and it is up-to-date information.

Tone and Balance
The content added overall is neutral. There is no attempt of persuasion.

Sources and References
The sources added are great choices. All are from scientific published journals and are all relatively recent. The content added is reflective of the sources used.

Organization
I thought the content added was extremely relevant, however I'm not sure if it needs to have it's own section. In my opinion, I think that the content could fit nicely in the "uses" section, as it talks about how copper ore is a desired product of malachite.

Talk Page
The talk page suggested to include uses of malachite. I think you did a great job by including the desire for copper ore. Overall there isn't much in the talk page.

Suggestions
As I mentioned above, I think the added information is great. I do think the lead section of the existing article needs to be edited a bit to include all of the sections of the article. I also think that the content added should be included in the "uses" section instead of creating a new section.