User:Renabee/Femtech/CosmicMasquerade-2000 Peer Review

General info
Renabee
 * Whose work are you reviewing?

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

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer?

''The lead has been reformatted and contains the same content as before but rewords it in a new way. Still holds similar content as before.''


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?

Yes, it gives a general idea as to what the technology is for.


 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?

Yes, it lists the various purposes it holds which signifies what will potentially be focused on.


 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?

No, everything in the lead is mentioned in the article.


 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?

No, it is concise, it can possibly have slightly more information just to have a more detailed start but not a lot where it looks too cluttered.

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic?

Yes


 * Is the content added up-to-date?

Yes, I noticed that the editor found some more recent sources which they will add to their article.


 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?

All the content presented pertains to the topic and makes it more detailed.


 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?

''This deals with the equity gap of female editors not being as common or taken into account, so it covers content that would not otherwise be expressed properly. It represents issues about women or uterus owners as a whole who have to deal with such health and societal issues.''

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral?

Yes, it mainly lays out the information and talks about the perception different individuals may have had but does not promote a specific side.


 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?

No


 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?

I think the Companies and Products has enough information, I believe that the Ethics section can cover another issue in more depth.


 * Does the content added to attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?

No, it simply presents the information clearly to show how much it has grown.

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?

Yes, there is a good blend of journals, literature, and articles that make it more informative.


 * Does the content accurately reflect what the cited sources say? (You'll need to refer to the sources to check this.)

Yes, #11 and #21 are the ones I tried which accurately express and define what was cited.


 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?

Yes


 * Are the sources current?

Most are from 2016-2019, the most recent are from 2020-2021 but I see that the editor will add sources from 2022-2023.


 * Are there better sources available, such as peer-reviewed articles in place of news coverage or random websites? (You may need to do some digging to answer this.)

I notice some are scientific articles while some are news articles (such as the Guardian), these are good sources but I do believe that more recent journals and literature are available.


 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Yes

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?

Yes, it is concise and clear


 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors?

This is not an error, but I believe that the line

"As an industry, femtech largely encompasses any digital or standard health tools aimed at women's health, including wearables, internet-connected medical devices, mobile apps, hygiene products, and others."

Can be reworded to be: "As an industry, femtech largely encompasses any digital or standard health tools aimed at women's health, such as wearables, internet-connected medical devices, mobile apps, and hygiene products."

Same suggestions applies to the line: "There are numerous femtech companies offering a variety of different products throughout the world. Companies that produce period- and/or fertility-tracking mobile apps include, Clue, DOT, Glow, Eve, Cycles, My Calendar, Life, FertilityIQ, Extend Fertility, Forte Medical, Flo, Lady Cycle and others."

''I feel that using "such as..." fits better.''


 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?

Yes, it is all sectioned off in an appropriate manner.

Images and Media
Guiding questions: If your peer added images or media


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?

There are no images present in the article, there should be some showing the apps for a better idea of the technology