User:Mxmansa/Acid–base titration/User8736 Peer Review

General info
Mxmansa & Sshoore
 * 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 (Introduction)
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer? New section on overshot titration is not mentioned in lead.
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Yes
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? Briefly mentions all major sections except overshot titration
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? No
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? Very concise

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic? Yes. Lots of details were added to acidimetry and alkalimetry section such as information of the process of each type of titration and general equations were added. The indicator table was good in providing more examples of types of indicators in an organized format. New section on overshot titrations is relevant to the topic. Graphs added to the graphical section is very helpful in delivering that information.
 * Is the content added up-to-date? Yes
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? Expanding on the concept of polyprotic acids may be useful Or information on calculations for a strong acid.
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics? n/a

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral? yes
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? no
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? no
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? no

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Yes
 * Does the content accurately reflect what the cited sources say? (You'll need to refer to the sources to check this.) Yes
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? Yes
 * Are the sources current? Yes
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible? n/a
 * Are there better sources available, such as peer-reviewed articles in place of news coverage or random websites? ThoughtCo source could be improved
 * Check a few links. Do they work? Yes

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? yes
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors? no
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? yes

Images and Media
Guiding questions: If your peer added images or media


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? yes, mainly the titration curves in the graphical section
 * Are images well-captioned? yes, but for the image with the caption "Three different points in an acid-base titration using phenolphthalein as the indicator" it may be helpful to explicitly differentiate which point the 1st and 2nd images are at because they look the same.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? yes
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? yes, could adjust the two graphs in the graphical methods section so it fits into its section instead of appearing in the previous and after sections.

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete? Yes
 * What are the strengths of the content added? acidimetry and alkalimetry and indicators
 * How can the content added be improved? Adding information on strong acid calculations and ployprotic acids in the content section