User:Pisawagner/Teratology/Najjar123 Peer Review

General info
@Pisawagner
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:Pisawagner/Teratology
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists):Teratology
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists):Teratology

Evaluate the drafted changes
The article's lead does a very good job in describing what teratogenesis is which is the topic for the article as a whole. The reader can grasp a very good idea from the lead alone, and the added information found in the draft assists the lead in a beneficial way. The content added about heavy metals in the draft elaborates more on how certain teratogens affect development, which is exactly what the article is lacking. Additionally, the alcohol section in the original article needed a lot more work done, and there has been good progress made for it in the draft. The new sources added in the draft are of good quality and quantity, which help the article be much more reliable and accurate with information. Lastly, the article is done in a neutral pattern, and the work done in the drafts keeps it that way. Organization for the article is done well, but sections need to be elaborated more on with the use of two or more extra images to give a better idea of the topic. Overall, I believe the edits done make the article stand out more and make it a better resource for the topic.