User:Osuprunchik/E-Z notation/Bthsctt22 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

 * Whose work are you reviewing? Osuprunchik
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: User:Osuprunchik/E-Z notation

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer?
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? N/A lead was not changed and article is too short to have a list of major sections.

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic? Yes.
 * Is the content added up-to-date? There were no sources added so this is hard to tell. The writer is adding information from personal knowledge.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? No, it fits in well with the article.

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? No, sources were not added to the edited text. Although I found one on the Bibliography sandbox page.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? The source was not an academic one so it would be necessary to fact check it with an academic source to ensure its accuracy and thoroughness. A better source might be an academic textbook with the same information.
 * Are the sources current? It was a website that said it was last updated in 2012.
 * Check a few links. Do they work? N/A

Images and media evaluation
N/A

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? The wording could be adjusted to flow easier when you read it.
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors? There were a few. The word "the" appears twice back-to-back in the first sentence. In the second sentence the word "is" before a methyl group, should be changed to "are" to have proper verb subject agreement since the sentence is talking about a plurality of substituents. The indefinite article "a" is also not necessary before the word hydrogen.
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Not really applicable since it was just a paragraph of added text.

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete? The article has more information on the subject than it did before.
 * What are the strengths of the content added? It expands upon the subject of E/Z notation and what that means.
 * How can the content added be improved? The content added should be edited for grammatical errors before being added to Wikipedia and make sure that it flows a little more easily.