User:Safrye8/Difluoromethane/Nstynka Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Safrye8


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:Safrye8/Difluoromethane
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Difluoromethane
 * Difluoromethane

Evaluate the drafted changes
The changes you made to the lead section are very valuable, as key information on the compound is included in the introduction. It may be beneficial to add another sentence just briefly summarizing all the things you talk about below the introduction, such as applications of the compound and its preparation. This is not that necessary but I think it would help in reflecting the contents of the page. The introductory sentence highlights the articles topic well and the language is concise.

The contents of the paper is relevant to the chemical compound being discussed. There seems to be an incomplete sentence in the draft (2nd sentence of uses). Another suggestion would be to remove words like 'excellent' when referring to heat transfer, it gives a sense of bias to the paper as that is not a term we would use scientifically. I also suggest rewording some of the material. For example you state "Difluoromethane in a zeotropic (50/50 mass%) mixture with pentafluoroethane (R-125) is known as R-410A", the wording seems a bit confusing, and could use some clarification. The contents seems to be up to date from the citations at the bottom, however I believe you might be missing some citations throughout the contents section. In the bottom paragraph not a single citation is used, it may be both beneficial and necessary to include those citations so people know where to get more information.

Your preparation section is well covered I would change "typically is synthesized" to "is primarily synthesized" or something along those lines just to help the flow of the sentence. The sentence also needs a couple commas I believe. The environmental fate of the article seems well written, but again I would make sure you are citing everything just so there is no confusion as to where the information came from. The toxicity section seems to cover important information and is well written. I would suggest that when edits are switched over you include the image in the environmental fate section and maybe describe it a little more. I would also recommend that you leave that chart on the side, which you were probably planning on doing. In the references list I believe citation 6 may need to be edited, it seems a little incomplete.

Overall great edits. My overarching feedback is to check citations and that you are citing all information additionally clear up wording. As far as the overall structure of the article it may make sense to place the preparation before the uses section. You could also change those section titles to synthesis and application just for terminology purposes.