User:Whishhper/Internal standard/Luckytooth Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Whishhper


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Whishhper/Internal_standard?veaction=edit&preload=Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Internal standard

Evaluate the drafted changes
The content is relevant, up-to-date, neutral and unbiased.

Whishhper did a great job in providing citation to every claims they made in the article. Coming from books and research journals, their secondary sources are looking good and reliable. The sources are peer-reviewed, thorough, reflective of the article's topic, and current. I think Whishhper has referred to the best sources to support the article. The links work, too.

Overall, the content is organized and well-written. Whishhper did a good job sorting and expanding the idea from the original article, hence making the article more understandable. Though, it is still somewhat jargon-heavy.

Great work adding info on History! The article become very encyclopedia-fashioned with this part added.

I would add a part where I explain the principles of choosing an appropriate internal standards (like what criteria make Yttrium a good internal standards).

I think it is hard to find a visualization for this topic, but I do have a suggestion to help with visualizing. I would retrieve 2 calibration curves, one that use internal standard, one that does not. Then I would explain how these curves illustrate an internal standard is a solution for any matrix effect or signal interference (if any).

One more thing, the Chem3xx lab manual states that Yttrium emission lines in ICP-OES are at 371.029nm and 360.074nm. I'm not sure if emission lines are different depending on instruments, but I would look into that.

Overall, the quality of the article is strongly improved. It is more informative, in-depth, better-organized and well-cited.