User:Jsinghal/Complications of pregnancy/Kak3456 Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

@Jsinghal


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

Evaluate the drafted changes
Hi Jsinghal! Here's my peer review for you.

 Lead 


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer? No not yet. I'd like to see an update to the Lead with a brief description of the article's major sections since it has been reorganized. Otherwise, the Lead is good as it stands - clear and concise without any information that is not in the article.

Content

 * Is the content added up-to-date? Most of the content that has been added by user:Jsinghal is fairly new. There are some older pre-2010 articles that may need to be refreshed or just removed from the original article, but I assume that will be a future editor's task.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? I'd also like to see an update of the info box as well. You added a lot of content and it would be nice to have a more robust info box at the top of the page.

Tone and Balance

 * Is the content added neutral? Yes.

Sources and References

 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Yes. The sources added are all from reputable sources and journals. As I mentioned above, they are also mostly current. Subheading Peripartum cardiomyopathy is really thorough and well written but there's only one source cited? It might be worth adding different references even though all the information might be covered by one source.
 * Check a few links. Do they work? Links work.

Organization

 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? Yes.
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors? I didn't see any during my read-through.
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Yes I am a big fan of the sections organized by fetal and maternal problems. Very easy to follow.

Overall Impressions

 * I thought that the article as a whole is written well and organized well. I'm a little bit confused by some of the subheadings having Caused by and Treatment bullets and not others. It would be nice have more consistency throughout the article (either having them or not - either is fine).
 * There's always a little more room for improvement - some of the subheadings don't have much information under them (i.e. placenta previa and accreta).
 * Overall the article is definitely more robust and better organized than it was before. You've made really good progress on it so far! Excellent work!

- Kak3456