User:A.abegail16/Dictyosphaeria versluysii/Lisac12 Peer Review

General info
Lisa Chapman
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing:User:A.abegail16/Dictyosphaeria versluysii
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists):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.) The article does a great job of describing Dictyosphaeria versluysii, especially its appearance, habitat, and distribution. It's clear and informative, providing a solid overview that complements existing knowledge. The structure, with separate sections for description, habitat, and distribution, makes the article easy to follow.
 * 2) * Is there anything from your review that impressed you? I was really impressed by the detailed description of the species' anatomy and morphology. The intricate details about its cellular structure and how it attaches to surfaces are fascinating and well explained.
 * 3) Check the main points of the article:
 * 4) * Does the article only discuss the species the article is about? (and not the genus or family) Yes, the article focuses specifically on Dictyosphaeria versluysii, although it briefly mentions related species for context, which is helpful rather than distracting.
 * 5) * Are the subtitles for the different sections appropriate? Yes, the subtitles are appropriate and clearly indicate what each section covers, making the article easier to navigate.
 * 6) * Is the information under each section appropriate or should anything be moved? The information under each section seems well-placed.
 * 7) * Is the writing style and language of the article appropriate? (concise and objective information for a worldwide audience) Each section sticks to its topic, contributing to a coherent overall picture of the species.
 * 8) Check the sources:
 * 9) * Is each statement or sentence in the text linked to at least one source in the reference list with a little number? it looks like sources are properly linked with citations throughout the text, which is standard practice and well executed here.
 * 10) * Is there a reference list at the bottom? Yes, there's a reference list provided, which is great for anyone looking to find more detailed information or verify the facts.
 * 11) * Is each of those sources linked with a little number? Yes.
 * 12) * What is the quality of the sources? The sources mentioned, such as scientific publications and botanical databases, seem reputable and reliable for scholarly work.
 * 13) 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):
 * 14) * What changes do you suggest and how would they improve the article?
 * 15) * 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? Consider adding more visual elements, like photos or diagrams of Dictyosphaeria versluysii, to complement the written description. Visuals can make the article more engaging and help readers visualize the species. Also, a section on ecological importance or interactions with other species could provide a broader understanding of its role in the ecosystem.
 * 16) What's the most important thing the author could do to improve the article? The most important improvement would be the addition of images or diagrams.
 * 17) Did you notice anything about the article you reviewed that could be applicable to your own article? The detailed approach to describing the species' anatomy and habitat is something I can apply to my own article. Ensuring each section is well supported by reputable sources is also a key takeaway.