User talk:LegoMagneto/Group transfer reaction
Peer review from Section 109
edit- The content available is well-written!
- The content is well organized into sections. Subdividing the Ene reactions into further sections is a good idea.
-You may want to consider explaining or linking to the pericyclic reaction Wikipedia page briefly. I see that this is just what's currently in the Wikipedia article, so you may want to consider revising the lead.
- You'll want to add more content to meet the 500-1000 words assignment requirement.
-You may want to try adding more references. Right now, your work may be leaning a little bit heavy on the three references.
-I like the plan to add figures and schemes.
-Good start overall!
Peer review
editYour peer review has been finished! Here is what I wrote:
Lead:
• The lead begins with a concise and clear introductory sentence that describes the key feature of group transfer reactions, making it clear that it involves a concerted reaction with orbital overlap.
• A Wikipedia page for "concerted reactions" is crosslinked, allowing the reader to explore the topics discussed further to gain a better understanding on the article, which I find to be an important contribution.
• The lead outlines the two major sections or subcategories of group transfer reactions (ene reactions and diimide reduction), which provides readers with a preview of the article's structure and content.
• Although there already existed a lead for the current version of the article, it was updated and better elaborates on the topic. I would say the Lead is relatively concise and has all necessary points addressed.
Content:
• The content added appears to be relevant to the topic of "group transfer reactions." It introduces the concept, highlights their defining feature (concerted reactions involving bond formation and breaking), and briefly mentions the two subcategories: ene reaction and reductions with diimide. The lead also references relevant literature by including citations.
• The majority of the content is up to date, with two references from 2016 and 2018, and one from 1992.
• There doesn't seem to be content missing or content that does not belong. It effectively introduces the topic and sets the stage for the subsequent sections of the article.
Tone and Balance:
• The content added appears to be neutral and focused on providing factual information about the topic of group transfer reactions. It does not contain claims or statements that appear heavily biased toward a particular position, and it does not attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another.
• The content is straightforward and presents the basic characteristics and subcategories of group transfer reactions in a clear and unbiased manner.
• There are no overrepresented or underrepresented viewpoints in the lead since it primarily provides introductory information about the topic. The content aims to establish a foundation for understanding group transfer reactions and their subcategories, making it impartial in its presentation.
Sources and References:
• From what has been added to the article, all information has been cited.
• From what I could see from the sources linked, the information added is in line with the sources they have, and they are accurate with what the sources say. Most of the sources are current, however there is one source that dates back to 1992.
•Three different authors are chosen for their references. One of the links comes from a peer-reviewed article, and the rest come from online chemistry textbooks.
Organization:
• The content added is concise, clear, and generally easy to read. It effectively introduces the topic of group transfer reactions and provides a basic understanding of the concept.
• The content is organized into sections that reflect the major points of the topic, including the defining feature, subcategories, and a brief description of the two main subcategories (ene reaction and reductions with diimide).
• There doesn't appear to be any significant grammatical or spelling errors in the content added. The sentences are structured well, making it easy to understand.
• There are some missing mechanism figures and a placeholder for a figure, however I believe these will be updated with actual figures later.
Images and Media:
• No media has been added to the article as of now, however based on the figure placeholders within the text, media will most likely be added later.
• Based on the description of this figure placeholders, they seem to fit well with the topic of the article and will help readers visualize group transfer reactions more clearly.
Overall Impressions:
• The content added has improved the overall quality of the article by providing an introduction to the topic of group transfer reactions and their subcategories. It makes the article more complete by offering a foundational understanding of what group transfer reactions are and how they can be categorized.
• The content effectively introduces the topic by explaining a defining feature of group transfer reactions and outlining the two main subcategories, ene reaction, and reductions with diimide. The content is well-organized with clear subsections, making it easier for readers to identify and understand different aspects of group transfer reactions.The content added acknowledges the need for figures, which will enhance the article's comprehensibility.
• Adding in these figures in lieu of the placeholders would significantly enhance the content and improve the article's quality
• The "Ene reaction" subsection could potentially be split up further. If there are distinct subtopics within the ene reaction, it would be beneficial to provide more subsections for a more detailed exploration of the topic. A table might be helpful in this case.
• Overall a great start! Sshoore (talk) 19:23, 8 November 2023 (UTC)