User:Aydenc2004/Sargassum polyphyllum/Jsmartzz Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

(provide username) Aydenc2004


 * Link to draft you're reviewing: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Aydenc2004/Sargassum_polyphyllum?veaction=edit&preload=Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template:
 * Link to the current version of the article: Sargassum polyphyllum
 * Link to the current version of the article: Sargassum polyphyllum

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? This article draft does a good job of giving a quick overall description.
 * 3) * Ayden Response: Thank you.
 * 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) This article mentions two other species belonging to the same family.
 * 6) * Are the subtitles for the different sections appropriate? There are no subtitles. I will add sections and subtitles.
 * 7) * Is the information under each section appropriate or should anything be moved? Information should be moved to appropriate subsections such as a "Description." The article mentions information already available in the taxa box. I will work on removing repeated/unnecessary info.
 * 8) * Is the writing style and language of the article appropriate? (concise and objective information for a worldwide audience) Yes, the writing style and language are appropriate, however, there is some wording needing change such as "it" in the first sentence. I will refer to the species subject by its name.
 * 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? No.
 * 11) * Is there a reference list at the bottom? No.
 * 12) * Is each of those sources linked with a little number? No.
 * 13) * What is the quality of the sources? No sources were provided.
 * 14) * I need to and will add my appropriate sources.
 * 15) 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):
 * 16) * What changes do you suggest and how would they improve the article? Find reliable sources to pull information from. More descriptive and add subsections to better outline your article.
 * 17) * 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? No, this article is not ready for prime time. This article needs reliable sources and more information describing what Sargassum polyphyllum is (other than mentioning algae once), what it does, and the environmental effects it's facing.
 * 18) * I’ll add my sources and look for additional information.
 * 19) What's the most important thing the author could do to improve the article? The most important thing the author can do to improve this article is to add reliable sources.
 * 20) I have sources, I just need to add them to the sandbox draft.
 * 21) Did you notice anything about the article you reviewed that could be applicable to your own article? Yes, I could be more descriptive of what my species looks like and how one would know if they found it.
 * 22) I’m glad my work can help yours a little bit.