User talk:Hydrosasso/Primitive mantle

Peer Review
Lead section: The lead section is good! I think it explains the topic well and there is nothing missing or redundant. I like how the last sentence mentions the chemical composition which leads into the bulk of the article. The hyperlinks are very helpful and well placed.

Article structure: I think the structure could be broken down a bit more. I think the introduction is really only the first paragraph, and the rest of the section should be separated into a new section with a new title. The second and third paragraphs give great detail on the potential history and current development of the primitive mantle, so the new title should reflect this. For the Chemical Composition section, you could add subtitles and discuss each method separately. This isn't necessary though because the information flows pretty well as is!

Balance of coverage: The balance of coverage is pretty good, but I think there could be more background information. The bulk of the article is about the methods of estimating the chemical composition, but I'd like to know more about the the purpose or history of the primitive mantle. Aside from that, nothing is off topic or unnecessary and the information is in line with the current literature. The article does not draw unwarranted conclusions or try to convince the reader of a specific view point.

Neutral content: This article is neutral. The only thing I can think of is if "The currently accepted scientific hypothesis..." could be read as non-neutral if there's controversy about how the earth is formed. If so, it might be worth including the other theories to remain neutral. I like that the article gives different methods of determining chemical composition without favoring one over the other. It factually states the methods and included benefits and drawbacks of both. I think this is done really well.

Reliable sources: There's a lot of sources in the reference section, but it looks like each one is only cited once throughout the article at the end of paragraphs. I think there should be a citation after each sentence that adds new information to the topic. Additionally, the third paragraph doesn't have any citations at all so that should be updated. The sources themselves look good though, all trustworthy peer reviewed articles.