User:MaxD02/Laboratory glassware/MitchB323 Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

DaleHabe


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:DaleHabe/sandbox
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Laboratory glassware

Evaluate the drafted changes
Content: The added or planned to be added information on test tubes and glasses is relevant and certainly important in understanding the history of laboratory glassware. The section about Jöns Jacob Berzelius was smoothly integrated into the article draft, as initially it was hard to tell where the new information was being added. You have a good basis for adding more material later.

Tone and Balance: Nothing added appeared to have any bias and didn't steer my opinion on the topic.

References: Citations that include links appear to work correctly, and the information used from these sources does not look plagiarized. Sources are reliable, mostly current, and there is a relatively large variety of them. The fourth reference looks to be unfinished.

Response
Thank you for the review. I plan on fixing that fourth source. Others who peer reviewed asked about what a lot of things are such as chemical glassblowing, Borosilicate, PTFE. There were some that said the wording can be confusing at times, and some links should be added. One said that there are too many details on the history of glassmaking in general instead of focusing on just laboratory glass.

In response to these I will look into chemical glassblowing, borosilicate, and PTFE and add a description of what they are and their significance. I will reread the draft to see if I can make the wording less confusing and put in links where I can. I will reread the part about history of glassmaking to see if it could be cut down, however I think that the development of glassmaking is an important precursor to laboratory glass so it may stay as is. DaleHabe (talk) 15:35, 25 March 2022 (UTC)