User:Stepagco/Copolymer/AccountAlias Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Stepagco, Chlorinetwist, Dashanator


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Stepagco/Copolymer?veaction=edit&preload=Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template


 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Copolymer

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.)

Overall, lots of good edits are being made in the sandbox, and I'm sure they will be a great addition to the Copolymer Wikipedia page when they are added. The following evaluation will primarily include feedback and suggestions for the sandbox draft, but will also include a few suggested changes for the article.

Lead

 * The Lead has not been updated to reflect the new content that will be added.
 * The Lead section does include a clear and concise introductory sentence to describe the article topic.
 * The Lead section includes a brief description of some of the article's major sections; however, "Reactivity ratios," "Microphase separation," and "Copolymer engineering" are not mentioned in the Lead. In addition, the new major sections that will be added from the sandbox should be mentioned in the Lead (i.e. "Properties," "Characterization," and "Applications").
 * The Lead does not include information that is not in the article itself.
 * The Lead is concise and has enough introductory information.

Content

 * There are some sections that could be added, but those are dealt with by the proposed sandbox changes.
 * The article does not deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps.

Tone and Balance

 * The content of the article is neutral. (The sandbox additions are also written in a neutral manner.)
 * There does not seem to be any bias.
 * There are not overrepresented viewpoints.
 * The article does not attempt to persuade opinion.

Sources and References

 * There are sections in the article that could benefit from additional sources. (Most of the new content in the sandbox is backed up with secondary sources of information.)
 * The sources seem thorough and relatively current.

Organization

 * The page overall is well-written and some subtopics are described in depth, but there are some sections that would benefit from more work (e.g. copolymer engineering). (A lot of this is resolved by the additions that are going to be made by the sandbox edits.)

Images and Media

 * The article does have some images that enhance understanding; however, it would benefit from more images in the linear copolymers subtopic.
 * The images are well-captioned.
 * The layout of the images is okay, except under “Linear copolymers” the IUPAC Recommended Term images are out of place and make the page look slightly off.

Overall Impressions

 * (The content in the sandbox significantly improve the overall quality of the article.)
 * (The Wikipedia article focuses a lot on what the different types of copolymers are, so the sandbox edits are great. They expand on the properties and applications of copolymers as well as characterization of copolymers.)

Properties
Right under the heading "Properties," there is a sentence that too closely matches the source of information.

Sandbox sentence: "Since vinyl acetate is more polar and larger than ethylene, the more vinyl acetate in PEVA, the higher polarity, lower crystallinity, more flexibility, and more adhesion."

Information source: "When VA content is greater, PEVA copolymer with higher polarity, lower crystallinity, better flexibility, better adhesion strength and clarity is obtained."

The in-text citation should probably be included after the first sentence rather than at the end of the paragraph. Right now, it looks like only the final sentence takes information from the source. This section might also benefit from having more than one source.

Properties — Glass Transition and Melting Temperatures
Well-written and informative. Again, it might help to have a citation before the final sentence, and having more than one source might be a good idea.

Maybe remove the word "really," because it is a bit informal.

Properties — Thermoplastics + Thermosets and Elastomers
Again, well-written and lots of interesting information. I think a few more citations may be helpful, but great job overall.

Characterization
I did not realize there were that many ways to identify the composition of polymers. Good work on this section.

Applications
Good work. I have nothing to critique in this section.