User:NolanOriger/Cell Engineering/Whomtao Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

NolanOriger


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:NolanOriger/Cell_Engineering?preload=Template%3ADashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cell_engineering&oldid=1018089567 (Nolan has already posted his changes, this is the previous article

Evaluate the drafted changes
Lead


 * There are multiple improvements to the Lead over the previous article. There are more hyperlinks that lead to to other articles,
 * Nolan's revisions improve on the previous intro sentence by expanding on the applications of cell engineering
 * There is a table of content that shows each of the major sections in the article, but not necessarily a description within the Lead's text
 * The lead does not include information that is not present in the article
 * The lead is very concise. However, the sentences that make it, though few, are very verbose. I think it contains a perfect

Content


 * The content that was added is relevant to the topic. Each of the sections within the article depict the steps of cell engineering processes. However, I'm not sure how relevant the Etymology of cell engineering is (but it is in a lot of wikipedia pages so....)
 * The content that's added is up-to-date (most papers are from 2010+, some from mid 90s but not the majority)
 * The only content that seems weird is the etymology section, though it is good information to have
 * The article does not deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps

Tone and Balance


 * The content added is neutral
 * There are no claims that are biased towards a particular position
 * There are no viewpoints that are over/under represented
 * There are no positions to sway the reader into thinking

Sources and References


 * Everything Nolan has added is backed up by a secondary source within the reference section
 * I checked the first two sources, and the information within them are properly represented in the additions in the article
 * The sources are thorough, they span from research papers revolving methods of cell engineering/recombinant DNA uses AND basic summaries of cell engineering as a whole
 * The sources are not all current. Some are from 19070 to 1990, but most are from 2010+.
 * I'm not sure if the spectrum of others is diverse in terms of historically marginalized communities, but the family names of the various authors do suggest many different people coming together in these research papers
 * Nolan did a good job choosing good quality sources. There are no news sections or random websites, each source is a quality research paper or summary paper with a relevant doi
 * The links work

Organization


 * The content is well written, very concise and relevantly organized. I think it would help to shorten the headings of the section titles (they are quite long)
 * The content does not have any grammatical or spelling errors I noticed
 * The content added is well-organized; each of the sections of the overview represent the steps of cellular engineering. Though, I'm not sure if they should be their own sections or subtitles within the main heading.

Images and Media


 * The image doesn't necessarily enhance understanding of the topic, but shows an example of cell engineering in a cool manner
 * The caption perfectly explains what is in the photo without being too long
 * The image adheres, with a CC BY-SDA copyright term
 * The image is laid out nicely, to the right of the Lead in free space