User:Neelkoladiya/Ethics of cloning/Mp6180 Peer Review

Peer review
This is where you will complete your peer review exercise. Please use the following template to fill out your review.

General info

 * I am reviewing the work of Neelkoladiya.
 * Link to draft: Ethics of cloning

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * I think the Lead gives the author a lot to work with. I think it is overly detailed, and should be more concisely written, because it is very long for a Lead as it is now.
 * I like how the author describes the positions of the different arguments he will describe later in the article, but since he does into detail later, it is less necessary in the Lead. In addition, there are no citations in the lead, which should be added to back up the points referenced.

Content
Guiding questions:


 * The content is relevant to the topic and up-to-date.
 * The content is heavily religious-based, and I think more secular arguments should be involved to show more of the debate of this topic.
 * The content regarding cloning of microbes, yeast, chromosomes, and plants, is not represented in this article.

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * The content is overall neutral, but is slightly more biased towards the side of anti-cloning sentiments.
 * I think that more data regarding the success rates and failure rates of cloning processes should be included, since it is related to the ethical debate. Which types of cloning works best? Why?
 * Data is also a good way to provide empirical data that is unbiased.
 * I think that more recently added content is more biased towards anti-cloning.

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * The sources in the article overall are current and the information is largely represented by citations.
 * The Lead seems to be lacking references.

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * The content could be more concise, as sometimes I read and feel that the writing gets lost in the arguments. The writing could be written in a slightly better tone which would reflect a more neutral stance on the topic.
 * The content could be broken down into more sections, such as adding "secular views," to contrast the "religious views" section.
 * There should be another section on cloning plants, and one on cloning microbes to provide a more clear image of the whole topic.

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


 * The author should add media to give the readers an idea of what cloned organisms look like.



Overall evaluation
Great work with developing this article! It is a really interesting topic with so much material already laid out to work with! I think the original authors had slight biases, but those can be easily fixed with some tweaking and adding in some other data. In addition, fixing up the lead would really help the reader in starting out reading your article! You got this!