User:Athib65/Antarctic petrel/Danielle Chibuzo Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

(provide username)


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

Evaluate the drafted changes

 * The lead doesn't include reflect the additions, it doesn't reflect the body of the article or the major sections, and it's not overly detailed.
 * The addition is relevant to the topic, but I think the second and third sentences should be switched.
 * The new addition is very neutral and unbiased.
 * The sources do reflect the topic subject, but one source is about 20 years old and the other source is at least 10 years old.
 * The added content is easy to read with no grammatical errors.
 * There are three pictures in the article, but they don't help understand the topic.
 * I think the second and third sentences should be swapped. I think It'll help with the flow of reading.