User:Omenlaptop15/Contaminants of emerging concern/Cschultz248 Peer Review

General info
Omenlaptop15
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing:User:Omenlaptop15/Contaminants of emerging concern
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists):Contaminants of emerging concern

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer? Yes
 * 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? Yes
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? No
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? Overly detailed

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic? Yes
 * Is the content added up-to-date? Yes
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? No
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Not addressed
 * Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics? Not addressed

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? 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? Unknown
 * 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? Couldn't find any
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? The lead could be less bloated

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? Simplistic explanations that are straight to the point without over complicating.