User:MaryGrace J. Larsen/Bromoethane/Nstynka Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

User:MaryGrace J. Larsen


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:MaryGrace J. Larsen/Bromoethane
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Bromoethane

Evaluate the drafted changes
While it seems that changes were not made to the lead section, the first sentence does a good job at giving a broad overview of what the compound is. It may be beneficial to add a sentence or two that summarizes some of the topics you discuss below the introduction, this will help in that it gives a brief description of the articles main sections. The language in the lead is concise and not overly detailed.

Some of the edits you suggested, such as including the IUPAC names, boiling point, GHS hazards and NFPA diamond (and some other things) are already included in the table (shown on right in original article). I do not think it is needed to have these show up again but it does seem like a couple of the values you have differ a little. It may be beneficial to compare your values to this table and see what needs to be changed, but I would not include them again.

For your uses and applications section, I do not think you need an introductory sentence, as that gives it the feel of an essay more than an encyclopedia. Additionally some of the wording in the section could use improvement (like changing the sentence that started with and). It may also be beneficial to expand on some of the original applications listed in the article.

Including the synthetic process seems very useful. I think this change was a great addition to the article, I would suggest moving that section above the uses. Another changed I found useful was discussing the NFPA and GHS hazards in the safety section. When checking citations, some of them do not seem to be cited correct in that they do not have a listed author and can not be accessed using a link. I would check your references section just to make sure you are not missing something.Additionally I would try to make sure that each fact is supported by a source. Great changes overall and good job maintaining a neutral tone.