User:Ashok306/Opheodesoma spectabilis/Destinycanoneo Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Ashok306


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Ashok306/Opheodesoma_spectabilis?veaction=edit&preload=Template%3ADashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template


 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)

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 the amazing species.

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? These creature varies in color and that they start their life cycle as planktotrophic larvae.
 * 3) * Any turn of phrase that described the species in a clear way? wormlike bodies and mouth surrounded by tentacles
 * 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). The article mentions general thoughts about sea cucumbers but everything else is specifically only about this specific species.
 * 6) * Are the subtitles for the different sections appropriate? Yes it is appropriate. I think it should be more descriptive headings such as habitat, diet etc. instead of just lead, body conclusion.
 * 7) * Is the information under each section appropriate or should anything be moved? Everything under each section is appropriate, I just think, again, it should be descriptive.
 * 8) * Is the writing style and language of the article appropriate? (concise and objective information for a worldwide audience) Yes! it has concise and objective information for a worldwride audience.
 * 9) Check the sources:
 * 10) * Is each statement or sentence in the text linked to at least one source in the reference list with a little number? Yes! Very organized, Each sentence is linked to the articles provided.
 * 11) * Is there a reference list at the bottom? Yes!
 * 12) * Is each of those sources linked with a little number? Link is provided in references but it isn't linked where you can access it from the article.
 * 13) * What is the quality of the sources? Great sources, very informative towards the specific species and also comes from .org sites.
 * 14) * 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). Life cycle is mentioned in article. Author could add more information about that.
 * 15) * What changes do you suggest and how would they improve the article? Changes I suggest are changing the headings about the specific topic of the species and maybe add if each color of the species differentiates from each other.
 * 16) * 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? Not at the moment, no. Many information could be added and changed around. Information such as classifying, itʻs habitat, its diet, how they travel/migrate, how it multiplies, and much more.
 * 17) What's the most important thing the author could do to improve the article? Again, headings. Being organized. Also to add pictures!
 * 18) Did you notice anything about the article you reviewed that could be applicable to your own article? I am doing my article on a sea cucumber as well so the general facts are mentioned in this article and in mines, such as the look of description and how it looks.