User:Acarmichael417/Conservation medicine/Lrokos Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Acarmichael417


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Acarmichael417/Conservation_medicine?veaction=edit&preload=Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Conservation medicine

Lead
I think the lead you wrote is really good! It is concise and offers a good overview of what conservation medicine is. I also think you did a good job of adding appropriate links to other wikipedia articles. I would suggest moving your sentence "Conservation medicine is the study of how the health of humans..." to the beginning of the paragraph just so people fully understand what this article is about right from the start. I would also suggest moving your current leading sentence to the prevalence section. The information is really good, but it would be stronger if moved around to the other section.

Content
I think adding information to your sections about health issues and conservation projects would be good, but the content you have now is really good, especially since your article was not very long to begin with.

Tone and Balance
Your content seems neutral, and there are not any claims that seem biased. Good job!

Sources and References
I feel like a lot of your content is as up to date as it can be (google scholar seems pretty dry for your topic). All of your sources look reliable and all of the links work when clicked on. One source I recommend using is "Essential veterinary education in conservation medicine and ecosystem health: a global perspective". It could be good to show how conservation medicine is important in certain careers/how it is applied in society on a smaller scale than through big organizations.

Overall impressions
I would definitely say your contributions have improved the wikipedia article, especially since there is plagiarism in the current article. You actually cited your claims in this, while the wikipedia article does not a of sources. I do not have many comments for improvement since your edits and contributions are strong. if you wanted to add more, like I said before, into health issues and conservation projects, that could be good, but I do not think its 100% necessary. Overall, great work!