User:BelleKahlua/Evolution of the Human Oral Microbiome/Bhuggins2 Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

BelleKahlua


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:BelleKahlua/Evolution of the Human Oral Microbiome - Wikipedia
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * User:BelleKahlua/Evolution of the Human Oral Microbiome - Wikipedia

Evaluate the drafted changes
Lead Section:

Overall, I think you did a great job with this article. Upon first read through, everything was easy to understand and the examples given helped to understand the content. A couple of small notes- I think that references are supposed to go after the period in Wiki format. So instead of it saying, "...human oral microbiome ." I think it's supposed to say, "...human oral microbiome. " I could be wrong about that though, so take that with a grain of salt. There was a sentence in the lead section where I thought the sentence was a little confusing, so I added an "Invisible Comment", but other than that, everything was great.

Content:

This article was full of technical information-yet it was easy to understand. That's definitely a win! I added a couple of commas and "Invisible Comments" throughout, but beyond that, I thought everything was good. The information pulled from the references seemed to be up to date and relevant to the topic. I found the "Genetic Diversity" section particularly interesting and liked the information about the various metabolites being sampled, as well as the portion discussing the shift in microbiota associated with the change in dietary behavior in humans. I wonder if this section could include information about the types of bacteria that were found to change during that shift, it could be interesting and could help to highlight the genetic diversity present at different time points in human history.

Tone and Balance:

I thought the tone of this article was neutral, it never felt biased to me. I don't think any viewpoints were over or underrepresented.

Organization:

The article was well organized. I liked how it flowed; starting broad and becoming increasingly more specific. The end sub heading talking about the particular bacteria species was interesting and I thought this was a good place for it. There were some minor grammatical errors that I corrected, the majority being additions of punctuation to correct run on sentences/phrasing issues.

Sources and References:

I referred to this above, but I think the references were formatted incorrectly. See above explanation. Source #5 on the article doesn't have a link that leads to the article, so that may need to be added. Other than that, the sources and references were solid.

Overall Impressions:

I think you did a great job. I really enjoyed reading this and thought everything was interesting. There was a nice balance of technical information and interesting examples so that nothing was too complicated to understand. Maybe if you find some time, you could add some images that could add to the article.