User:Kristinavalle22/Forensic serology/Basil B Caraway Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Kristinavalle22


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Kristinavalle22/Forensic_serology?preload=Template%3ADashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template


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

Evaluate the drafted changes
The lead was updated to make the purpose of confirmatory tests more understandable. Would it be more concise to write "to confirm the identity of the unknown substance"? The definition within the lead is clear and accurate and, therefore, I agree that it did not need to be changed. All other aspects of the lead section look good.

The content that was added to the article was relevant to the topic. This information provided an explanation of a commonly used blood presumptive test and gave a method for urine detection. All content within the article is new within the last 10 years (2012-2022). I believe there is still potential for information regarding the immunochromatography tests that are used in forensic serology for detection of blood and urine, not just saliva.

I could not detect any bias within the writing of the article. All the information was accurate and citations were added to attribute the information back to a source. However, I am unsure if a couple of the sources can be considered reliable secondary sources as per Wikipedia standards. It may be worth getting a second opinion on this (specifically references 1 and 2). All links are working.

I did not pick up on any grammatical or spelling errors. And the article is overall well organized. The content that was added is well-written and easy to read. One small thing that could be fixed is rewording the urine detection writing to omit the word "you".

The image was pre-existing and adheres to the guidelines.

Overall I think the editing is well done, it addressed major issues with references and added a key section on urine detection that was outlined in the lead section but not elaborated on. The only recommendations I have are to potentially add in information on immunochromatography methods for urine and blood, ensure the first two sources used are considered reliable secondary sources, and omit the word "you" from the urine detection section to provide a more formal writing style.

Great work!

From Kristina22Valle,

Hi there, thanks so much for taking the time to review my article! I made most of the changes you suggested however, for immunochromatography, i have not been able to find a reliable source that specifically discusses this process for the detection of urine, only articles that focus on drug detection within the urine. I'll try to keep look for a good source to add this into my article!