User talk:Hxu459/Rare-earth element

Leilani's Peer Review
PinkmicrobeLW (talk) 06:03, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
 * 1) Lead: The Lead is overall good. It introduces the concept of REE recycling briefly and efficiently. For the second sentence, instead of "Despite these facts" it should be "Despite this" and instead of "1% of the REE" it should be "1% of REEs". In the last sentence, remove "In this condition" and it should be "efficient, high-tech, and environmentally friendly products" at the end.
 * 2) Structure: Switch the first and second paragraphs' order. The section on how REEs are recycled should come before what REEs are recycled (e-waste). The paragraphs don't need to be numbered. It would also be good to separate them into Sub-headings. Make "Recycling and Reusing REEs" the Heading and make 2 sub-headings such as "Potential Methods" for paragraphs 1 and 2 and "Challenges" for paragraph 3. For a wiki article, you don't need to state the article year in text. You can just say "Studies suggest" and add the citation at the end. In the second paragraph, the sentence "There are some researches as follows." should be omitted. You could also omit the last sentence of the second paragraph. In the first paragraph, you should separate the clauses with a colon, so "There are essentially two options being considered for a secure supply of REEs which are from primary resources..." should become "There are essentially two options being considered for a secure supply of REEs: primary resources...". Omit "For example" in the next sentence. In the first sentence of the second paragraph, "...have been increasingly focused recent years" should be "have been increasingly focused on in recent years".
 * 3) Coverage: The coverage is overall good. It includes both recent studies in the topic and introduces the challenges to REE recycling. You could add some more details to the last paragraph about why REEs are difficult to separate (what about their chemical structure makes it difficult?) and why the Gluconobacter bacteria is a solution (how more effective is it in separating individual REEs?).
 * 4) Neutral content: There are sections where the neutrality could be better. For the first paragraph, instead of "The e-waste contains significant concentrations of REEs. In this condition e-waste is the great source for REEs recycling", put "E-waste contains a significant concentration of REEs, and thus is the primary option for REE recycling". In the second paragraph, instead of "The main points people concern includes the environmental pollution during REEs' recycles and how to increase recycle efficiency" say "The main concerns include environmental pollution during REE recycling and increasing recycling efficiency". And in the last paragraph, omit the phrase "which is environmentally friendly".
 * 5) Reliable Sources: Source 10 should be reviewed. It comes from a science news website, but the link to more details on the research referenced about Gluconobacter bacteria seems to be a dead link.