User:Tnmanning/Petroleum/EaglesEyes1 Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Tnmanning


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:Tnmanning/Petroleum
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Petroleum
 * Petroleum

Evaluate the drafted changes
Hi Tnmanning. First, I must admit that I have not read the entire Petroleum article; it's huge! You have picked a very appropriate article for ERTH 4303, though it may be an ambitious undertaking. I appreciate that your draft so far has focused on very specific aspects of this article's purview. That being said, wading into a discussion of war and conflict related to oil is risky business given that these are contentious issues. Regardless, away we go.

Formatting
Citations go after punctuation (ideally at the end of the sentence) and are kept separate from Wiki links, such as this link to the Wikipedia Manual of Style.

Lead
No edits to the lead appear to be made. This makes sense, as the existing lead summarizes that article well, and you have added into existing sections. The original lead is well-written. It is a bit long, but this is justified given the scale of the article.

Content
The expanded content added is very relevant to the topic and thoughtfully added into existing sections. I like what you've added, I just wish that there was more; there are new references provided, but not too much new information. For the most part, new content is up to date, but I do question the utility of a paperback book from 1994 as a source for petroleum deposit inventories. I'm not an oil expert, but the statement that "[p]etroleum deposits are in hardly any countries around the world" seems a bit inaccurate, or may suffer from awkward phrasing. There are no equity issues, though there is some sensitive content associated with conflict and war.

Tone and Balance
Overall, the tone of new material is non-persuasive and unbiased. Given that conflict and war is discussed, attention to tone is essential. For example, the statement "Some conflicts start when countries like Russia" could be read as being judging. Instead, it can be modified to "Conflicts may start when countries refuse to cut oil production ... as experienced during the 2020 Russia–Saudi Arabia oil price war."

I feel that there is a lack of nuance in the conflict section that could be balanced by presenting an alternative view. Similarly, though its not your material, there is a blanket statement in the ocean acidification section which suggests that "increase[s] in acidity inhibits all marine life." This is not accurate and should be clarified to bring more balance to that section.

Sources and References
The sources included are diverse and credible. I really like the variety you have retrieved. That being said, a couple are a not current and the article would benefit from more thorough citations. I have provided a handful of references that may be of use.

Organization
Good organization. A couple small typos and the formatting issues I mentioned. There is some awkward phrasing, including "Other conflicts start due to countries wanting petroleum resources or other reasons on oil resource territory like the Iran–Iraq War." I'm not quite sure what you are trying to say here and I suggest a rewording.

Overall Impressions
A good start to tackling a daunting article. I recommend building upon your contributions by providing more nuance and by introducing a broader spectrum of perspectives to the sections you have added to. My article draft is a work in progress, and it is imbalanced as a result, so I fully understand. Rewording some of those sentences will clarify your information.

Thank you for the opportunity to review your work. Happy writing!

Cheers,