User:Andrewsaillant/Squat lobster/Cochrajg Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Andrewsalliant



Evaluate the drafted changes
Is the content added relative to the topic?

Yes, all of his edits were adding more relevant detail to the behavioral aspect of the Squat Lobster.

Topics he contributed to: Live footage, Claw Position Behavior, Aggression and Agnostic Behavior, Breeding

Is the content added up to date?

Yes - all articles were from around the last 10 years

Is there content missing or content not up to date?

All of the content seems up to date. One thing that might need to be further elaborated is the serotonin study done on the Squat Lobsters. I recommend adding a sentence that shows how injections of serotonin and its effect on aggressions demonstrates the squat lobster's natural levels. In addition, is there any more information about how Squat Lobsters fertilize and reproduce? There are mentions of when mating happens, but not much information past that. Is the content added neutral?

Yes, all of the content was neutral! Nothing was trying to accomplish a certain opinion, everything was quite objective.

How are the sources?

For the most part, the sources seem up to date and valid articles. The one citation that seems a little iffy is the first one - the citation has a red warning that there is a missing title, which is likely an easy fix. It also comes from a website that is not peer reviewed, so I am not sure whether it can be included in this page. I forget if every source needs to be peer reviewed, or if you need only a certain number of sources to be peer reviewed. Maybe look into that. There is also an error on the 8th citation, but I can't fully comprehend the error text.

All the links work for the sources mentioned in the edits!

Does the article include images that help understanding?

Yes the article does include images, but I believe they were already there before the team went in to update.

Is the content well written?

Yes - the sentences written are fluid, neutral, yet comprehensive. The information provided connects to one another, and there aren't abrupt sentences which seem out of place. Overall great job writing! The one note is to make sure the writing doesn't become too much like an essay. For example, using phrases like "seemingly" and "as such" may not be the most concise and definitive way to present this information when on a Wiki page.

Overall Feedback

Overall these are some great additions. Andrew filled in some big behavioral gaps that the website previously lacked. The content was well summarized and written, there are just some minor comments that could further improve his work as mentioned above.