User:Bcant085/Australian Shepherd/Nouha Mihoubi Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Bcanto85


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:Bcant085/Australian Shepherd
 * 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
As there was no new information added which was not already discussed in the article, there was no updated lead in the draft which makes perfect sense. The lead in the original article was also very concise and to the point. It was not overly detailed or too broad, and offered a general understanding of the topic to be discussed. Considering this, i understand why you chose to not change anything about it. When it comes to the content that was added, it was relevant to the topic, and provided new information where it was really needed (the health subsection for example only consisted of one sentence in the original article, so adding on to it was necessary). Also, the sources used reflected the available sources well, and were not outdated. Also, your choice of not adding any photos to the article, which is already full of photos, makes sense as there is nothing new to add.

Overall, I feel like more could be added for the health sub-heading, and the Hip dysplasia subheading in particular which i think could definitely use additional information. Since the article is very short and does not offer detailed information, it would be good to add on to that as much as possible to make sure that the final article will provide all the information needed on Shepherds. Other than that, I think you're doing great and should continue to add more information in the same way you have been doing.

Good luck!