User:Sschriber/Ana María Cetto/Pkayku Peer Review

General info
Sschriber
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:Sschriber/Ana María Cetto
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Ana María Cetto
 * Ana María Cetto

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.)Overview

In general, your additions improve the article by providing supporting structure and evidence.

Content

One notable addition you made was 'Kramis': is that her name? She doesn't seem to use this name in any publication or professional (or otherwise) setting.

Tone/Balance

Overall, the article does not seem to be skewing the reader towards any direction, which is good. there's no outright bias. There are some grammatical upgrades that could be done though. see: "...she did a master's degree in biophysics, then returning to Mexico..."

Organisation

Good word has been done with sectioning and organisation. Addition of links to comlex topics eg. stochastic electrodynamics would improve the article some more.

There are also instances of open quotes that do not close. see professional career section.