User:Spqr mc/Phosphiranes/ChloroCatBench Peer Review

General info
I am reviewing spqr mc's Wikipedia page on phosphiranes.
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:Spqr mc/Phosphiranes:
 * 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


 * I think the lead is concise and informative, but would benefit from a figure (like a simple phosphiranes chemdraw).
 * You should also include a brief description of the article's major sections.

Content


 * I like how you explained the different ways to synthesize phosphiranes and the different reactions they can do, and included references to papers and figures. They're very detailed and informative, and provides a well-balanced overview of what's been done in the field.
 * I'm not too familiar with phosphiranes, but are there any applications of phosphiranes? Like as ligands, catalysis etc. I think if you can find papers that discuss the applications, it would be a useful to have a section dedicated to that.
 * A minor suggestion is to italicize certain prefixes. For example, instead of t-butyl, I think it's more conventional to italicize it as t-butyl.

Tone and balance


 * The article is neutral and unbiased.

Sources and references


 * You incorporate a large and diverse scope of papers that include past work and current work. Your sources are thorough and reliable, and you accurately reflect what the sources say.
 * Some of your footnotes have check-date errors, but that should be an easy fix.
 * I think Wikipedia pages tend to put footnotes after the period, whereas you put footnotes before the period. Not sure which one is the right way to do it, but just wanted to point that out.

Organization


 * The article is well-organized and divided into appropriate sections. Each section is well-written.
 * I don't see any grammatical/spelling errors.

Images and media


 * I think it's very helpful that you have figures/schemes for each reaction you talk about.
 * More of a stylistic thing, but some of the Chemdraw schemes seem to be a bit off-center/unevenly spaced (for example, the first figure in your draft, the 1,2-dichloroethane is a bit crooked and the spacing before/after the arrow is uneven).
 * I also think it would be helpful to have a structure of phosphiranes at the top to show the readers what it typically looks like.

For new articles


 * You should link your page to other articles, such as the original phosphirane article. You should also link specific terms/compounds you mention to existing wikipedia pages (like electrocyclization) so if readers don't understand a specific term, they can find the relevant article quickly.
 * Otherwise, the article looks great! It meets the notability requirements, follows the patterns of other similar articles, and has a long list of sources.

Overall impressions


 * Content is very informative and organized, and a fun read! You reference a lot of sources, and your figures support that.
 * I think adding another section for applications, tidying up the chemdraws, and linking your article to existing wikipedia articles will help!