User:Yaatch/Partial melting/Connorhs25 Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

(Yaatch)


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Yaatch/Partial_melting?veaction=edit&preload=Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template


 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Partial melting

Evaluate the drafted changes
Lead

- The lead has been updated and expanded.

- It does include a new introductory sentence that summarizes the article well.

- The lead includes paragraphs showing what is in the article later on.

- Everything in the lead is covered later in the article.

- The lead is a little overdetailed and could use some trimming.

- Overall, the lead is well written but might need to be shorter and more concise.

Content

- Content added is relevant to the topic and enhances the article greatly.

- The content has been sourced from sources ranging from 1972-2022 so there is some old and new information suggesting it is up to date.

- All the content added does belong and I don't believe there is anything that is completely missing. There are many subtopics added that further enhances the article content.

- The article does address an underrepresented topic as partial melting is not widely taught or known. Even though there is a source from 1972 I believe this topic is fairly new in modern human history and is still being understood (not sure though).

- Overall, the content added is well researched and further develops the article.

Tone and Balance

- Content added is neutral. There is no feeling of persuasive writing or bias throughout the article.

- There are no claims that favour a certain position.

- For overrepresented/underrepresented, I think the lead could have a little too much info and that could be added to the body paragraphs, helping with the overall balance of the article.

- Overall, no biases in the writing and no persuasive writing.

Sources and References

- New content is sourced from great sources of information. Might need to cite more just in case. (Ex: first paragraph is 3 sentences but only last sentence is cited, unless the whole paragraph is cited with same source then it should be fine)

- The content reflects the sources well. May need to pull additional info out of them to help with the Mechanisms subtopic and the list of mineral deposits as mentioned.

- Sources are thorough and are all scientific literature.

- The sources range in date from 1972- 2022 so there is a mix of old articles and new.

- Articles are almost all written by different authors (except for source 1 and 6 written by Attila Kilinc) which shows great diversity in authors.

- There are plenty of sources (especially compared to the original article having 2 sources) and the addition of more will only aid.

- Links to sources work

- Overall, great sources and info pulls from each.

Organization

- Content added is well written and clear as there are new subtopics added and others are rewritten well in better subtopics (such as adding pressure and temperature together).

- Some grammatical errors:

- Under "Composition" subtopic, "graywackes" could be written as graywacke I believe.

- Some citations throughout the article are before the period and some are after. I think they should all be after the period.

- Third paragraph in "Partial Melting", the sentence "Since conduction is a insufficient..." could be written as "Since conduction is an            insufficient...".

- In the references there is the error "Check fate values in..." for citation 3 and 9. I had the same error and I fixed it by removing the month/day from the date, which will just display the year and should fix this error. Just need to hover over the reference and press edit I believe.

- Content added is well organized and reorganizes the previous structure of the article into subtopics that make more sense.

- Overall, well organized just need to focus on the grammatical errors (not many).

Images and Media

- Article includes images that help in understanding the topic. One image is a diagram of mantle partial melting and the other image is a table that shows the relationship between temperature and physical composition, displaying the physical state of the mantle.

- Images are well captioned and go in depth explaining what they are showing.

The images appear to adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations as they are cited.

- The images are laid out in an appealing way as they are all on the right side of the page and they are in the right subtopics. The first image could probably be added to the lead paragraph instead (even though it shows partial melting of mantle right under the lead) and shift the second image to the temperature subtopic as it shows the relationship between temperature and composition.

- Overall, images in the article are great, might need to be moved.

Overall, great additions and development to the article. May need to shorten the lead a bit and fix grammatical mistakes and then it will look like a well-balanced article.