Talk:Oxidative aerobes

Graham's Peer Review
Overall the added sections and the contents included are all relevant and significant to the topic, with respiration being important in defining what an obligate aerobe is and ecology a likely topic of interest to readers. The placement of the respiration section before the ecology section also makes sense as respiration is considerably more important. Each section also begins with the most important information before diving into the details, such as the reactions involving superoxide dismutase. However, the part about the evolution of obligate aerobes is not relevant enough to the topic of respiration. This statement can be moved into the lead until a section on more closely related to evolution is created.

As for the content, they are presented neutrally and there are no redundant or irrelevant statements. Of course, more detail on the different processes involved can be added. But for now, creating links to other relevant Wikipedia articles will be a great start. This can be done by putting square brackets around the term you are using in the sentence, for example, aerobic respiration. As for the writing and flow of the edits, there are some run-on sentences, especially in the second paragraph of the respiration section. Some commas can also be added to improve flow, such as after “In most aerobes” for the second sentence in the second paragraph under respiration.

Other improvements include adding the source for the information written at the end of the first paragraph under the respiration section. As well as using more sources, especially from peer-reviewed journals or books as those are more reliable, and citing them in a consistent format. However it should be noted that the information taken from the currently used sources have been well presented in the editor’s own words. Cxjyang (talk) 04:04, 9 November 2017 (UTC)