Maybe these are beautiful, but whoever made them is blatantly not a professional graphic designer or typographer. From a graphic design POV, it's hard to justify rating these higher than 8/10.
I don't want to detract from how great this is!
But, if you want to be anal about graphics... There are a lot of little mistakes that could be improved on.
The text isn't justified and sort of meanders left and right.
Nothing is quite correctly centered.
Little bugs like stray lines (in the middle top one, TLC).
Capitalization is really inconsistent.
Sometimes there are paragraphs, sometimes there are separate sentences. Sometimes there are sentence fragments.
Some of the graphics don't follow standards for contrast, like the 2nd from the top middle, black on blue is very hard to read for someone with a low vision. Then there's light blue on white.
The spacing is really inconsistent horizontally. There's pretty uniform space on the left (usually) but on the right it's clear things just end when they do sort of squeezed in. Sometimes it's the other way around and the left is squeezed in.
Some of the fonts are basically impossible for me to read, never mind someone with dyslexia. Look at this one, 2nd page, https://static1.squarespace.com/static/62185f3b81809a6fd03dd...
Sometimes arrows are thick and black, sometimes they're hollow, sometimes they're much thicker and red.
That's just a few. Still awesome though!
On the other hand, by the standards of what an undergraduate organic chemistry student is looking for from a free online resource, and given that it is just one guy doing this, in his spare time, I think this is absolutely fine.
(I have a competing website on organic chemistry and I think this guy does a much better job on graphics than I do.)
It takes time and training to pull off design like this, and while it might work as a fun infographic, it is not as polished or beautiful as it could be. There is room for improvement.
As far as the "graphic design POV" goes, that involves intuitive assessments of things like negative space, colour, and density of graphic elements and text. It involves things like the five Gestalt principles, or the CARP principles, although these are not prescriptions that anyone can follow. They're more like rationalisations of what has been found to work.
> For organic chemistry is NEON or 8 valence electrons is key.
I can't tell if I just don't know ochem or what.
> All atoms are reactive except the noble gases (group 18). These are stable due to a full outer shell. For organic chemistry is NEON or 8 valence electrons is key.
It should probably say something like. "For organic chemistry, what you see in NEON, attaining those 8 valence electrons, is key." Atoms want to participate in bonds to reach what Neon already has going on, 8 valence electrons. A full valence shell.