User:Banthas/Restriction fragment mass polymorphism/22alia Peer Review
![]() | Peer review
Complete your peer review exercise below, providing as much constructive criticism as possible. The more detailed suggestions you provide, the more useful it will be to your classmate. Make sure you consider each of the following aspects: LeadGuiding questions:
ContentGuiding questions:
Tone and BalanceGuiding questions:
Sources and ReferencesGuiding questions:
OrganizationGuiding questions:
Images and MediaGuiding questions: If your peer added images or media
For New Articles OnlyIf the draft you're reviewing is for a new article, consider the following in addition to the above.
Overall impressionsGuiding questions:
Examples of good feedbackA good article evaluation can take a number of forms. The most essential things are to clearly identify the biggest shortcomings, and provide specific guidance on how the article can be improved.
Additional Resources |
General info.
[edit]- Whose work are you reviewing?
Banthas
- Link to draft you're reviewing
- User:Banthas/Restriction fragment mass polymorphism
- Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
- Restriction fragment mass polymorphism
Evaluate the drafted changes
[edit]- The lead is unchanged from the article's current state. It does an okay job of summarizing the "Overview" and "Methodology" sections, but it does not match any of the content in the "Application" section. It also does not cite any sources. This could be fixed by talking about the applications listed in the lead in the "Application" section, and adding a sentence to the lead about HPV detection.
- The content added is relevant- it explains how this process actually works and how it is used.
- Most of the sources in the "Applications" section are from 2011 to 2013- if there are any more recent sources, consider using them instead.
- The "Overview" section is a little confusing right now. The first sentence says that RFMP is the use of MALDI-TOF, but, if I understood correctly, that is just one step in the process. This section should instead start with a more general overview, more similar to what is currently in the lead section.
- The line "with the intent to allow for more SNP polymorphisms" should be fixed. I'm not sure what you mean by "more", since my understanding is that RFLP cannot detect SNPs at all. (Also, "SNP polymorphism" is redundant, you can just say "SNP")
- There are a few grammatical errors throughout that need to be fixed. Also, at the start of the "Application" section, it says "RFMP can serve as a more general functionality" when (I assume) it should say "RFLP"
- I am not sure if the section describing its use for HPV detection is properly "balanced"- it may be worth checking with a professor or TA
- Overall, good job! This is a very good expansion of the original article, it just needs to be polished a little