Reviewer: Tram Anh Dao

1. Synopsis: This module explains in detail about quarks and sub-nucleon particles through the Standard Model. It also talks about particle accelerators and how they work in detecting these sub-particles.
2. Keywords: Quarks (Wikipedia), Particle accelerators (Google), Sub-nucleon particles (Bing)
3. Review Details: I like the charts you have added to this module; they are very clear in categorizing the subparticles.
It would be very helpful for readers if you include more introduction info at the beginning before diving into the topic right away. Since in chemistry 2A does not go into detail with the topic of quarks and sub-nucleon particles, it would be difficult for us to grasp the content of this module without a good basic understand of subparticles.
Also, credit the charts and diagrams if you have taken them from website or if you have created them yourself. If you have taken the charts and diagrams from websites, make sure they are under creative commons license or it would be consider plagiarism. Overall, this module seems complete and detailed. I hope this review is helpful.

Links: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quark, http://www.egglescliffe.org.uk/physics/particles/newfolder/acc1.html, http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/astro-ph/pdf/0512/0512519v1.pdf

Reviewer Name: Bernadette Azizkhan
1. Synopsis: The module is about quarks and their sub-particles. It goes into detail about their spins and the category of generations they are in. Also, talks about their the fundamental forces and how they affect the particles, and the particle accelerators machines can be applied to particle physics.

2. Keywords:
Particle physics(bing/Wikipedia)-very skeptical about your tables looks a lot like the one on wiki and your image Collision of 2 beams of gold atoms recorded by RHIC is on the page for Particle physics
Quark (bing/wiki)- The picture that you have under Hadrons is also from Wikipedia.
Hadrons (google/wiki)-clear.


3. Review Details: I am really concerned about your tables and the collision pic, the tables almost look like you copied and pasted from wiki, and also make sure you can use that collision picture from Dr. Larsen. For the quarks section I felt like it was heavily influenced by wiki, so maybe you should really list Wikipedia as an outside resource instead of a link. In all I felt the majority of the module was very much influenced by Wikipedia, but was very well done in terms of paraphrasing. The length seems at nice size. After reading the module, I felt like I understood quarks a lot more than I had after taking physics! I wasn’t able to find that many grammatical errors. Good Job.
4. Fix one mistake in the Module:
From: The elaborate, often spectacular collisions are what scientists used to determine that quarks and other particles smaller then electrons, protons, and neutrons exist. The different color patterns and schemes of the collisions can determine spin, charge, and momentum of the particles in the collision.
To: The elaborate and often spectacular collisions are what scientists use to determine quarks and other particles smaller then electrons, protons, and neutrons exist. The different color patterns and schemes of the collisions allow scientist to determine spin, charge, and momentum of the particles in the collision.

Review of Case Study: Quarks and other sub-Nucleon Particles by Kristina Bonnett

1. Synopsis:
The module skillfully explains quarks and sub-nucleon particles. It breaks this title into quarks, leptons, fundamental forces and bosons, hadrons, and particle accelerators. The webpage begins with describing the pairing and characteristics of particles for particular generations. It then uses subheadings to explain each concept in detail. It ties the concepts together by showing interaction between them.

2. Yes, the module is ready to go. Spelling is accurate, and module is informative.

3. Review Details:
Length- Overall appropriate; however, more examples for each section would be feasible.
English- Good proofreading, it makes sense and is well written.
Figures- The figures are not referenced by number in the text. The figures do provide appropriate visual representation for their section. More applied examples may be helpful to the reader.
Tables- There are two tables: not referenced by number in the text. The written explanation for it is helpful.
Text- Text- The introduction may be improved through providing a more clear summary of the webpage. While the outline contains subheadings, they are sort-of thrown on the page with little transition and explanation linking them or providing and initial introduction for them. However, the module does follow its subheadings and it organized accordingly: the content of the paragraphs is helpful and clear.

4. Fix one mistake:
I corrected for grammatical reasons.

5. Plagarism checks:
http://www.articlechecker.com/
Matched Phrases Google Results Found
Total Matched Phrases / Total Submitted 0% (0/90)

http://www.dustball.com/cs/plagiarism.checker/
Text being analyzed
Result
Electrons, muons, and tauons have a -1 electromagnetic charge whereas
Possible Plagiarism
Antiparticles are identical in characteristics and mass to there corresponding
Possible Plagiarism
tunnel uses superconducting magnets and huge amounts of energy (as
Possible Plagiarism
Electromagnetic force- this is the force between any two charged
Possible Plagiarism
electron antineutrino νe muon antineutrino νμ tauon antineutrino ντ
OK
Which fundamental force utilizes the photon boson: A) gravitational B)
Possible Plagiarism
baryons have antiparticles known as antibaryons and just replace quarks
Possible Plagiarism
Gravitational force- this is proportional to the particle's masses and
Possible Plagiarism
I checked each of these links to Possible Plagiarism and they all referenced the webpage for the module; therefore, it is in the clear.
http://www.plagiarismchecker.com/url
The results shown include the ChemWiki webpage for the module, so it is in the clear.

6. Figure Check:
http://tineye.com
The Figure for Hadrons comes from wikipedia.com; therefore, it is acceptable for use.
However, I do have questions regarding the Figure for Particle Accelerators: I noticed that the Figure has taken from outside sources. It is not Referenced accordingly in the text. Therefore, I am not sure whether this image should be used. I recommend that this image has a Source written below it, and is cited in the References (even if permission to use the figure has been granted). This way, it will be clear where the image is coming from. Right now, it looks like the image could have been taken from any one of a number of sites. Tinyeye.com shows the sites to find the image.
As for the tables under Particle Generations, tinyeye.com did not pick anything up. The tables appear to be either a wikipedia.com table or a handmade table. I would suggest verification from the contributor as to their source.