User:Powell Cat/Hormone/22alia Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Powell Cat


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:Powell Cat/Hormone


 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Hormone

Evaluate the drafted changes
(Compose a detailed peer review here, considering each of the key aspects listed above if it is relevant. Consider the guiding questions, and check out the examples of what feedback looks like.)

- The lead has not been updated- however, since the revisions made do not significantly change the overall content, I think that is fine

- There isn't really any content gap filled, since most of the edits are just rewrites and adding citations- this is still useful, but I'm not sure whether it meets the assignment criteria

-- However, adding a stub article for prohormone actually does help fill a content gap

- The added content is neutral, as it is all factual and does not really take any kind of stance

- The organization is improved from the original article, as the updated sections all flow better now

- Most of the sources in the edited content are relatively recent, within the 2010s at least, so I think they are up-to-date