User:A.abegail16/Dictyosphaeria versluysii/IkaikaRSM Peer Review

General info
A.abegail16
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:A.abegail16/Dictyosphaeria_versluysii
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists):https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dictyosphaeria_versluysii

Evaluate the drafted changes
Please answer the following questions in detail addressed to the classmate whose article you are reviewing. Remember this is constructive feedback, so be polite and clear in your suggestions for improving their article. We are all working together to improve the Wikipedia pages for species native to Hawaii and for the World to meet.

Use a different font style (bold or italic) for your answers so it is easy for the author to see your comments!


 * 1) First, what does the article do well? (Think about content, structure, complementing the existing article, writing, etc.)
 * 2) * Is there anything from your review that impressed you?
 * 3) ** This article impressed me because it gave a lot of information about the species.
 * 4) Check the main points of the article:
 * 5) * Does the article only discuss the species the article is about? (and not the genus or family)
 * 6) ** The article discussed what the species is, the family, and the class.
 * 7) * Are the subtitles for the different sections appropriate?
 * 8) ** The article had appropriate subtitles. It also had three different sections about the organism and a reference section.
 * 9) * Is the information under each section appropriate or should anything be moved?
 * 10) ** Nothing should be moved each section was well organized and well explained.
 * 11) * Is the writing style and language of the article appropriate? (concise and objective information for a worldwide audience)
 * 12) ** The writing style and language of the article is very appropriate and easy to understand.
 * 13) Check the sources:
 * 14) * Is each statement or sentence in the text linked to at least one source in the reference list with a little number?
 * 15) ** Almost every statement or sentence was linked to one of the three references of information, and they were marked with a little number.
 * 16) * Is there a reference list at the bottom?
 * 17) ** Yes, there was a list of references at the bottom of the article.
 * 18) * Is each of those sources linked with a little number?
 * 19) ** Yes, the sources were linked with a little number at the end.
 * 20) * What is the quality of the sources?
 * 21) ** These sources are quality sources because they all had a lot of information and seemed credible.
 * 22) Give some suggestions on how to improve the article (think of anything that could be explained in more details or with more clarity or any issues addressed in the questions above):
 * 23) * What changes do you suggest and how would they improve the article?
 * 24) ** As far as I see in this article, I wouldn't change a single thing about the information and sources used in the article.
 * 25) * Is the article ready for prime-time and the world to see on Wikipedia? If not, how could the author improve the article to be ready?
 * 26) ** This article is definitely ready for prime time because all the information was on point and to me that's what makes an article a good article.
 * 27) What's the most important thing the author could do to improve the article?
 * 28) * The most important part that the author come improve upon in the article is adding more information.
 * 29) Did you notice anything about the article you reviewed that could be applicable to your own article?
 * 30) * One thing that I noticed in the article is that the lead section wasn't labeled as "lead", and I feel like I should label my lead section like that also.