I think it’s a relevant comment. The article does very little to explain what she did that was useful. The Wikipedia article... sort of suggests her comments were more impactful but it’s hard to assess that claim.

The article even adds

> Eventually, there was nowhere to turn but back to “her Newton,” as she affectionately started calling it. She found the proofs “very boring” and the commentary “very difficult,”

Which doesn’t do the work any favor. Without any intent to slight women’s contributions or ability to contribute to science, I didn’t get the sense that this was a hugely important work.

The titles claim that she transformed physics sounds egregiously overstated in that regard.