User:Thewiecker/Medicine in ancient Rome/GirlBoss14 Peer Review

Peer review
This is where you will complete your peer review exercise. Please use the following template to fill out your review.

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing? Thewiecker
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: Medicine in ancient Rome

Lead
The Lead been updated to reflect the new content added, especially to encompass Soranus and Asclepiades. The Lead includes an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes medicine in ancient Rome. The Lead could use a few more additions that include a brief description of the article's major sections like early hospitals, medicine, and diagnostic methods. The Lead includes information that is present in the article and is concise.

Content
The content added is relevant to the topic and is up-to-date. There does not seem to be any content that is missing or out of place. The article includes information about women in medicine, therefore addressing topics related to historically underrepresented populations.

Tone and Balance
The added content and claims are neutral and are not biased in any way. There was no singular viewpoint that was represented more than another and the content does not seem to persuade the reader whatsoever.

Sources and References
New content is backed up by reliable secondary sources of information that are peer-reviewed and reflect the article's topic. The sources are current and include a diverse spectrum of authors. The links seem to work as necessary.

Organization
The content is well-written and concise and does not seem to have any grammatical errors. There are a few spelling errors (such as using the word through instead of though), but they are easily fixable. Major points are broken down into sections and sub-sections that make sense organizationally.

Overall impressions
The article is certainly more complete due to the content added-- especially in the Lead and the section labeled Surgical instruments. The content added has plenty of citations to back up its claims. Other than fixing spelling errors, I do not suggest any other edits to improve the added content.