User:Mxmansa/Acid–base titration/Ccustodi Peer Review

General info
Mxmansa
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing:User:Mxmansa/Acid–base titration
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists):Acid–base titration

Evaluate the drafted changes
(Compose a detailed peer review here, considering each of the key aspects listed above if it is relevant. Consider the guiding questions, and check out the examples of what feedback looks like.)

Lead:

The lead has been updated to but does not seem to reflect new changes in the article. The introductory sentence of the lead does provide a concise overview of the article topic. The lead also provides a good overview of the major sections within the article. Furthermore, the lead is concise but it seems to exclude the section on mathematical analysis.

Content:

All content added to the article is relevant to the topic and is up to date. Additionally, all of the content seems to belong in the article. This article could also include sections on different types of acid base titrations. For example, titrations of zwitterions or species with multiple acidic sites of varying pKa could be discussed in more depth. Back titrations could also be discussed in more depth. This article does not address any equity gaps nor does it discuss historically underrepresented populations or topics since this article's main focus is to discuss the acid base titration, which is a well known technique.

Tone and balance:

Yes, the tone of the added content was neutral.

Sources and references:

While all information added is appropriately cited with reliable and current sources, it would benefit the article to include more citations: especially in the sections "Overshot Titration" and "Mathematical analysis: titration of a weak acid".

Organization:

The content of this article is well written, organized, and is easy to follow.

Images and Media:

All images added to this article relate to the topic and will certainly help the reader gain a better understanding of the topic. While some images have captions, the captions are not very effective at providing an in depth description of the figures. Additionally, some figures are not labeled.