User:Sayam 2154/List of inventors killed by their own invention/RavenofRavens Peer Review

General info
(Sayam 2154)
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Sayam%202154/List_of_inventors_killed_by_their_own_invention?veaction=edit&preload=Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists):List of inventors killed by their own invention

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

Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer? Yes, it has been updated.
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Yes, it does include an introductory sentence.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? Yes, the lead includes a brief description of the article's major sections, outlining the categories of ill-fated inventors such as Automotive, Aviation, Chemistry, Industrial, Maritime, Medical, Publicity and entertainment, Railway, Rocket, and Miscellaneous inventions.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? Yes, it includes information about Ismail ibn Hammad while the article does not have anything written about this inventor.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? The lead is summarized well and provides the main points in the article.

Content

Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic? Yes it is relevant, as it includes thorough information about specific inventors, their innovations, and the tragic circumstances surrounding their deaths.
 * Is the content added up-to-date? Yes it appears to be up to date including recent events such as the OceanGate submersible mishap involving Stockton Rush in 2023 and Mike Hughes' death in 2020.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? The article seems to be missing information about inventor Ismail ibn Hammad. He is mentioned in the lead but not in the article.
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics? The article focuses on inventors from various regions and backgrounds. It sheds light on the risks and challenges that inventors have faced throughout history.

Tone and Balance

Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral? The article appears balanced in tone, with factual facts on each inventor, their inventions, and the circumstances surrounding their deaths. There is no bias or attempt to influence the reader's opinion in favor of one position over another.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? No, not really.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? No, everything is balanced well.
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or awav from another? No, the writing is very neutral.

Sources and References

Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? The new content is backed up by reliable secondary sources of information, including books, articles, and news sources. However, some citations are incomplete or missing proper formatting.
 * Does the content accurately reflect what the cited sources say? (You'll need to refer to the sources to check this.) The content does reflect what the cited sources say and provides information about each inventor and their inventions.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? The sources cover a wide range of subjects about doomed inventors and their creations, supplying a broad overview of the subject.
 * Are the sources current? The majority of the sources appear to be current.
 * Check a few links. Do they work? So far the citations and formatting seem to be missing.

Organization

Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? The content added is generally well-written, with concise and straightforward language throughout.
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors? There are some instances of grammatical errors, spelling mistakes, and awkward phrasing.
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Yes the content is well-organized and is broken down into categories such as Automotive, Aviation, Chemistry, Industrial, etc.

Overall impressions

Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete? Overall, the content added has improved the overall quality of the article by providing comprehensive information about inventors that were unfortunately killed by their own inventions.
 * What are the strengths of the content added? The addition of information about inventors from various fields such as automotive, aviation, chemistry, industrial, etc. has enriched the article and made it more comprehensive. Also, the content is well-organized, with sections clearly broken down to highlight the major points of the topic.
 * How can the content added be improved? There are grammatical and spelling problems within the content. Proofreading and editing could improve the overall quality of the material.