User:Kmart0915/Food safety/SamSince2003 Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

(Kmart0915)


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * 


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

Food safety

Evaluate the drafted changes
Your lead defines physical contamination happens with dangerous objects around the kitchen, but the article already states that physical contaminants could be objects like hair or plant stalks, which may not be considered dangerous. Therefore, you may change how you define physical contamination in your lead. Also, it would be better if your lead comes right under the header Physical contamination. It seems little bit weird when the article lists physical contaminants(which are examples) then define what a physical contamination is. However, your tone throughout your body paragraph is neutral, informative, and relevant ot the topic. I like that it is concise, but I think you should not be afraid to add some details when you says something like negative consequences. I can't see an image on your Sandbox so I'll skip that part. Overall, your content is interesting and I really enjoyed reading it and knowing it, but it could have been better if it's more organized because I found it redundant that you're listing examples of physical contaminants again in your paragraph when there already are some examples.