User:BCRacheBio/Malacosteus australis/Parkaln Peer Review

Peer review
This is where you will complete your peer review exercise. Please use the following template to fill out your review.

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing? BCRacheBio
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: Malacosteus australis

Lead evaluation

 * The introductory sentence is concise and does describe the article's main topic—Malacosteus australis
 * The lead does not contain a brief description of the article's major sections; this is due to the lack of additional sub-sections in the article
 * The lead, however, is concise and is not overly detailed

Content evaluation

 * The content added by my peer is relevant to the topic and is up-to-date
 * There, however, does seem to be information about the Malacosteus australis that has yet to be added. Going back to the previous point in the lead evaluation, as more sections are added, it'll be useful to add/reference them in the lead

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral?
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?

Tone and balance evaluation

 * The content is neutral and does not serve as a tool to persuade readers in one direction or another
 * Overall, the content that has been added so far is not biased towards a particular side and does a good job in presenting facts (and not opinions)

Sources and references evaluation

 * The source that was cited is from a reliable secondary source
 * As more content is added in this wiki article, it'll be important to cite sources from a diverse group that are also not out-dated

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?

Organization evaluation

 * As of now, there isn't much information to organize, so there aren't any glaring issues.

Images and media evaluation

 * Images were not added, but it may be useful to add some pictures to help readers visualize

New Article Evaluation

 * Although this isn't a completely knew article, it does need additional reliable secondary sources, as there is only one being cited/used currently
 * As referenced below, it is in a good place for now. There just needs to be more information added and updated as more research is done

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete?
 * What are the strengths of the content added?
 * How can the content added be improved?

Overall evaluation

 * Overall, the content that has been added so far is good. It lays out the points well, in a concise and neutral manner
 * The main way I can see an improvement is through adding other additional information about the Malacosteus australis