User:Annabellebeaton/Giant Pacific octopus/Julia Serra Peer Review

General info
Annabelle Beaton
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing:Giant Pacific octopus
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists):Giant Pacific octopus

Evaluate the drafted changes
(Compose a detailed peer review here, considering each of the key aspects listed above if it is relevant. Consider the guiding questions, and check out the examples of what feedback looks like.)

The article changes are very detailed and provide relevant additional information while being mindful of existing information in the existing article. There is a great eye for detail in identifying an incorrect statement and rewriting it to have up to date and accurate information, in regards to the reproductive section. The flow of the additional statements goes well with the existing information while providing new and important details. The information is concise, clear to read, while remaining detailed and takes on a neutral tone. The one confusing aspect is the existence of both a Lifespan and reproduction section as well as an additional reproduction section in regards to climate change. I would recomend renaming that heading or combining information. Otherwise great changes made to this article.