User:Redpoppys/Environmental impacts of electronic cigarettes/Climatecrisis02 Peer Review

General info
Redpoppys, Climatewarrior88, ASCM20
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing:User:Redpoppys/Environmental impacts of electronic cigarettes
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists):

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.)

Lead: Add a section at the top introducing the article to give the reader a short background on what is going to be in the article.

Content: You guys did a great job citing reliable sources in the environmental risks section. The content does seem a little short, so it might be a good idea to add more sections on things like history and alternatives. Also, the recycling and consumer behavior as well as the legislative and recycling initiatives sections are two sections that could be expanded upon or even made their own Headings rather than sub-headings. There is a lot of information on these two topics and could be interesting to research.

Tone and Balance: The content is definitely swayed against vaping, but its really hard to go against that position so you guys did a good job of only stating facts and leaving out opinions. I'm not sure if it would be a good idea to add a section discussing some type of benefit of vaping compared to smoking/if the smoke is less harmful for the environment, etc, but it could be something to think about?

Sources and References: You seem to have a good variety of sources, and all of the data seems to be cited by a reliable source. They are also all very current, which makes them more reliable. It might be beneficial to include more neutral sources, as all of the titles obviously go against vaping and smoking. Overall great job on the sources.

Organization: Great organization, the content is broken up in a way that makes the paper super easy to follow. The information under each subheading is very clear and concise, and there are minimal spelling errors. Organization looks great.

Image and Media: Adding some images or other media would greatly help the reader follow along. Maybe add some graphs to help show the distribution of different environmental risks like carbon footprint, recycling in different countries, etc.

Overall Impressions: Overall a great page. I think you could add some more information and sections to make it a more extensive research page, but all of the information is cited and accurate and the organization is great.