User:AudreyS99/Blackbelly lanternshark/AudreyS99 Peer Review

General info
I am reviewing the whole page with contributions by Jeremiahbravo, Rexyshy8, Kkitrick, Adoung, and AudreyS99
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:AudreyS99/Blackbelly lanternshark:
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Blackbelly lanternshark

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.)

Overall, the additions to this article are done well. This review aims to point out specific changes that can be made to improve fluency of the article, but these critiques should not be taken as a negative review of the article in any capacity. Some strengths of this article include the detail provided on each of the subjects, notably in the Morphology, Diet, and Habitat sections that accurately summarize information found in scientific sources.

Lead

 * The lead provides a short summary of the article and serves its purpose well.
 * Additional research could be done to fact check if blackbelly lanternsharks are ovovivparous.
 * Sources provided could be updated to include the most scientific and peer reviewed sources where that information is located (like replacing citation for fishbase with a peer reviewed article that has the same information).
 * An additional sentence could summarize information in the human interaction section.

Content

 * Content provided is relevant. A few grammatical changes could be implemented to reinforce the accurate meaning of the language.  These examples are listed below, but generally speaking the additions are well structured and referenced.
 * Generally, internal links can be added to key vocabulary words for all sections of the article.
 * Morphology: "It" can be replaced with E. lucifer or blackbelly lanternshark to improve understanding, a definition for denticle or link to an internal Wikipedia page could be added
 * If interested, additional sources are suggested in the sandbox page on how to add more information to this section, especially details concerning the visual and other sensory organs of blackbelly lanternsharks and how these might suggest specific behaviors.
 * Diet: The second sentence can remove "with" in the section "with the most common being," the third sentence does not need to say "instead of crustaceans" as the source does not specify that these organisms are definitively not eaten, similarly the fourth sentence can exchange "maintained myctophids in their diet" for "been found to consume myctophids," the end of sentence four appears to have been cut off so this thought should be completed as well
 * If interested, information in the second source used for this section provides additional information on the trophic level of E. lucifer.
 * Taxonomy: If interested, a phylogenetic study was conducted and is linked in the sandbox that provides additional information concerning the relatedness of E. lucifer to other bioluminescent sharks.

Sources and References

 * Citations are generally good and rely on academic sources. A few changes could be made to remove unnecessary sources (like the BBC article)
 * References should be looked over to ensure correct formatting (for example source 3 in the sandbox) and make sure there is no duplication of references (potentially like 3 and 12 - fishbase)
 * At the time of this review, not all references had been reformatted into a single reference section, which will be done as well.

Organization

 * The article is decently organized, though additional changes may be made as sections continue to develop.
 * The article is thus much more complete with these additions. Suggestions on additional details are explored in the content section of this review.