User:Megthetrilobiter/Petroleum geochemistry/Peach-boi1 Peer Review

General info
Megthetrilobiter
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing:User:Megthetrilobiter/Petroleum geochemistry
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists):Petroleum geochemistry

Lead

 * Lead has been entirely reworked, is concise and compact, and does a good job introducing the articles topic. Though could serve as a bit more of an overview of what the reader should expect to see while continuing.

Content

 * Content added is up-to-date, and is very important to the topic. Only suggestion would be to expand on what the types of petroleum are and what differences they have.
 * Article does not deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Content added is unbiased and neutral. Does not attempt to sway the reader.

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Links appear to all be functional and of reliable sources. Though perhaps the inclusion of additional peer reviewed sources could be a good idea (perhaps for the types of petroleum)

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * The content added is well-written it is concise, clear, and easy to read/follow along for the most part.
 * The line "Petroleum is a non-renewable energy source (also known as a "fossil fuel"), so the efficacy of extraction and refining is important for its continued use." under the techniques heading is unnecessary and could be information added instead to the lead.
 * Content is while organized but is italicized and bold which makes it difficult to read at times.

Images and Media

 * No images have been added, maybe add a picture of the chemical compounds of each type of petroleum when adding to it?