User:Wilsondaily/Initiation (chemistry)/Shiba111 Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Wilsondaily


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:Wilsondaily/Initiation (chemistry) - Wikipedia


 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Initiation (chemistry) - Wikipedia

Lead
The editor has done a good job introducing the topic and giving an overview of what will be discussed in the content. the lead is concise and not too detailed for someone who just wants to understand what initiation is. I think the editor can briefly mention "Initiation can occur in many different ways as described, with photo (light) and thermal being the two major ways" in the lead to emphasize their important over other ones. I would remove the first heading (definition) as that is more like an introduction and most wikipedia pages don't need a heading for the introduction.

Content
All the content added is related to the topic and most of the content is up-to-date. I really like the contents added, they are very clear and easy to understand. Great work on that!

Some small improvements can be:


 * both contents in the thermal and photo-initiation sections need more citations. Each section only has one citation, adding more supporting sources would improve the reliability of the article.
 * show the full name of RAFT the first time (like what they stand for) and provide a short explanation of what they are
 * Initiation by the catalyst is mentioned in the leading section but never talked about it after and since the editor mention the other two are more common, maybe briefly explain why initiation by the catalyst is not as common as the other two methods, so it doesn't seem like this method is purposely left out.

Tone and Balance
Everything in the article is neutral and all claims are not biased toward one side. No viewpoints are overrepresented or underrepresented.

Sources and References
All the references are pretty recent, and all the references are from reliable publications and resources. Both the thermal and photo-initiation section is mainly supported by one source, providing more sources to support the information to improve the reliability of the article. We only need one reference, which is the one at the bottom of the page (the one wikipedia generated).

Some wikipedia articles are linked multiple times and some require linking. For example, monomers were linked multiple times; however, adhesive, microelectronic, and polymerization have their own wikipedia pages so they should be linked. Just some small cleanup will fix this problem.

Organization
The article page is very organized and easy to follow. there is some information that seems to be repeating, but I think the editor didn't have time to remove it, such as the two reference sections and the two paragraphs before the definition section.

Images and Media
The images enhanced the understanding of how initiation works at the molecular level.

Both images seem to cover more content than just initiation (ie. propagation or work-up and they both have their own wikipedia page). Maybe find another image or highlight the part that is initiation so your audience can follow better. The image under photo-initiation are going into the conclusion section. Reformating the image can solve this problem.

Overall impression
Overall, the editor did a good job showing the general idea of initiation and explaining the key terms in a way that is easy for the general public to understand. The strength of the content added is showing a few specific examples of initiation and a few references to back up the claims. However, few claims were from the same citations, which lacks sources to back up the information. More citations can really help with the overall quality of the article. The editor can also improve the quality of the articles by linking some terms with existing wikipedia pages, as I have mentioned in the source and reference section.