User:TheResearchRaven/Chondrocalcinosis/ImagingMatters Peer Review

General info
TheResearchRaven
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * Chondrocalcinosis
 * 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.)

I cannot find any edits in the sandbox so I can only comment on what I see on the article itself. Hoping I am picking up on the new edits made for this class.

Lead: Lead gives a good concise description of what the article is about

Content: Content addressed all parts of the topic covered in the lead. Info appears up to date as 5 of the 8 references are within the last 7 years. Could possibly describe where in the body this can occur; is it only in joints or the spine? Appreciate that statistics were given to address how common this occurrence is.

Tone & Balance: Did not feel that the article showed any bias. Well written with factual information.

Sources & References: Appears that 6 references were added to the article that all seem to be relevant and timely information. Links work and take you to reputable articles and information.

Organization: Article is easy to read due to concise nature. Organized well into specific topics.

Images & Media: Great use of images in the article along with linking to other topics presented in the article.

Overall Impressions: From what I can tell, the updates to this article are beneficial to a reader as up to date references were added along with clarifying some of the wording from the prior version of the article.

~ImagingMatters