User:Sean831/Caffeine dependence/JennaHCesar Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Sean831


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Sean831/Caffeine_dependence?veaction=edit&preload=Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Caffeine dependence
 * Caffeine dependence

Evaluate the drafted changes

 * The lead and introduction paragraph are great! You did a great job of detailing what caffeine is and it's chemicals that give it its nature that make so many people depend on it daily. I also enjoyed how you included some more background information on caffeine- like how different people around the world consume their caffeine (they drink tea or coffee). I did notice that a citation where it has "(Fulgoni 2015)" perhaps may be cited incorrectly within the article (at least for Wikipedia standards)- I think we're supposed to create a link using the 'cite' button in the tool bar to cite our references? I didn't fix it because I'm not sure, but thought that was worth noting. Overall though, your introduction and lead sentence gave a great summary of what will be discussed in the whole article.
 * I loved reading your content! It was all easily connected to the main topic- caffeine dependence. I enjoyed reading about how caffeine creates dependence, not addiction. I also learned a lot about the physiological effects of caffeine dependence and the recommended amounts that should be consumed by different groups of people. I really don't have any feedback to give here, the content is really good and explains very well caffeine dependence and its effects.
 * The whole article takes a very neutral stance, everything is very informational and evidence-based.
 * The content is organized very well. There were like two words/grammatical things I changed in the intro, but extremely minor. Everything flowed really nicely and all connected well. The content is also well-written and thought out- everything made sense and was very informational for me to read. I liked how when explaining why caffeine was a dependence and not an addiction, you incorporated scientific parts/evidence but didn't make it too scientific to where someone wouldn't be able to understand or follow what you were saying.
 * Overall, you did a really good job of adding new information and expanding on certain parts to make the article really informational, well-written, and complete. There were many strengths to the article- organization, the information that was being shown all tied together and reflected the main topic- caffeine dependence, the incorporation of scientific evidence, different researchers POVs were expressed, and the overall quality of the article was really high. Perhaps if time allows, you could expand more on the "Tolerance" section of the article because there isn't much content there, especially when comparing it to the other sections (however, I know with my article there is more evidence and information available for certain sections than others, so only add more if applicable and able to). Again, awesome job on the Wikipedia article project, it looks great!!