User:Bcant085/Australian Shepherd/Samirasrour Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Bcanto85


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Bcant085/Australian_Shepherd?preload=Template%3ADashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Australian Shepherd
 * Australian Shepherd

Evaluate the drafted changes
The content this user has written to the existing sections are well-researched and add to the article. There is no repetition, rather they develop on these concepts and add information that was missing. For example, in "Appearance", they added heterochromia and in "Health" they added autoimmune thyroidosis. I am honestly surprised the official Wikipedia article did not have this information, the user is definitely improving it through their research.

The tone of the article is very neutral; the user does not appear to be biased in any way and delivers concise information in an easy-to-understand manner. Reading the article was very quick and simple, and the sections are clear and respect the format of the pre-exisitng article. There are a couple of grammatical errors: "ability to heard" should be "herd" and "the physical health and comfort of the dogs skin" should be "dog's/dogs' skin". Nothing to serious, maybe just some little overlooks. An added bonus is that they provide tips and tricks to care for the Australian shepherd's well-being, which is always appreciated.

The user's sources however do lack some variety. Most of the information seems to come from different editions of the American Kennel Club or Canadian Kennel Club journals, as well as ASCA's official website. I understand that it is probably hard to find scholarly articles for dog breeds, but perhaps encyclopedias or biomedical/psychological animal research articles are available. Nevertheless, these references are reliable and consistently used. Everything is cited.

The only area I believe that is lacking is that the user does not link their content to other Wikipedia articles or external websites. I think the article would benefit from this, but I am sure the user has already planned on doing this later on in their drafting.

Overall, the user's draft will improve the quality of the article, or at least equal it since the article itself is rated as B-class. Some elaboration, if possible, would be interesting, especially if the user can find additional sources from different places and add links to other articles. Those would be the only improvements I can recommend. In short, this draft is very strong and well-done, and would be ready to move into its final stage after a bit of tweaking.