User:Raquilano/Evaluate an Article

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1FmiVFovGe2u0R_k2E81DMztoZFUJbEZ8kyRrWDTnKKE/edit?usp=sharing Which article are you evaluating?
(Provide a link to the article here.)

This article is relevant to this particular course and is quite detailed as is.
(Briefly explain why you chose it, why it matters, and what your preliminary impression of it was.)

== Opening sentence clearly describes the topic of the article as a whole. The first lead paragraph is concise and easy to read. The contents of the wikipedia page are listed below the lead properly. No instances of first person writing (i.e. the article was neutral). All sources are cited correctly and provided at the bottom, and all are credible primary and secondary source papers. Only two very small images detailing the chemical processes discusses in the article. It potentially could have more images especially earlier on in the lead paragraph. Though some sources are given, it appears many statements have been made without sufficient sources to back them up. This is a relevant theme throughout the peer-reviews in the talk section. ==

(Compose a detailed evaluation of the article here, considering each of the key aspects listed above. Consider the guiding questions, and check out the examples of what a useful Wikipedia article evaluation looks like.)