User:UrbaSag/Lipoyl synthase/Tdehart4 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? UrbaSag
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: User:UrbaSag/sandbox

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer? Lead is present in article, but was not edited
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Could use work; begins with the chemical equation the enzyme is responsible for, not the importance of the enzyme itself
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? No. A table of contents is present in the author's draft though
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? Yes. The importance of this enzyme to "eukaryotic model organisms" was never mentioned again
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? Relatively concise, could be revised

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic? Yes
 * Is the content added up-to-date? Yes
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? The original content on the current wiki page should be revised and incorporated into your sandbox draft

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral? Yes
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? No
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? No
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? No

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Mostly. The "Associated Organisms" section needs references
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? More sources could be added
 * Are the sources current? The sources in your sandbox draft are current
 * Check a few links. Do they work? The sources in your sandbox draft work
 * Additional note: Consider reworking the references on the original wiki page. It is okay to use them if they are current and correct; however, as the page currently stands the references are just bullets without explanation. The actual information on the page itself has no indication of where it came from.

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? Yes
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors? No, the content is grammatically correct. Some sentences may benefit from being less lengthy though.
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? For the most part, yes. Consider breaking the "Associated Organisms" down into a sentence or two rather than a list; purely for organizational reasons. Also, these need references if you're claiming they utilize your enzyme.

Images and Media
Guiding questions: If your peer added images or media


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? No. Consider pulling a predicted or crystalized structure from the Protein Data Bank (PDB); there are already links to PDB on the existing article. Be sure to cite appropriately if you decide to do this.
 * Are images well-captioned? N/A
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? N/A
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? N/A

For New Articles Only
If the draft you're reviewing is a new article, consider the following in addition to the above.


 * Does the article meet Wikipedia's Notability requirements - i.e. Is the article supported by 2-3 reliable secondary sources independent of the subject? N/A
 * How exhaustive is the list of sources? Does it accurately represent all available literature on the subject? N/A
 * Does the article follow the patterns of other similar articles - i.e. contain any necessary infoboxes, section headings, and any other features contained within similar articles? N/A
 * Does the article link to other articles so it is more discoverable? N/A

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete? You're definitely on the right track, and the content you've decided to add (currently in your sandbox) seems appropriate! Consider revising some the current wiki page's information too; it looks like it could benefit from attention.
 * What are the strengths of the content added? The function and mechanism sections you've added will be very helpful and informative to people interested in this enzyme! Additionally, it's nice to have a list of organisms this is present in; but, this could become very lengthy if this is a common enzyme. Be sure to reference how you know this enzyme is present in said organisms as well. Overall, the topics you've selected are very important additions!
 * How can the content added be improved? More detail and reliable sources are always helpful —particularly like sources 2 & 3 which are from peer reviewed journals. Additionally, the information on the current wiki page could benefit from expansion and reorganization — especially in the references tab. Ideally, each reference will be incorporated as you have done in your own sandbox draft; the current wiki page just lists everything at the bottom without actually citing any claims in the material above.