User:Bencie/Achatinella mustelina/KLeal14 Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

(KLeal14)


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

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?
 * 3) ** Something that had impressed me was more topics were added
 * 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)
 * 6) ** Yes the article only discusses the species that is supposed to be talked about
 * 7) * Are the subtitles for the different sections appropriate?
 * 8) ** Yes I think that the subtitles for the different sections are appropriate to talk about
 * 9) * Is the information under each section appropriate or should anything be moved?
 * 10) ** I feel like maybe the reproduction and lifespan section could be put together into one section as it is talking about the life of the mustelina and then reproducing to make new life
 * 11) ** Copy that! Thanks!
 * 12) * Is the writing style and language of the article appropriate? (concise and objective information for a worldwide audience)
 * 13) ** Yes the language style is appropriate
 * 14) Check the sources:
 * 15) * Is each statement or sentence in the text linked to at least one source in the reference list with a little number?
 * 16) ** There is no references linked yet
 * 17) ** yes, thanks I forgot to do that!
 * 18) * Is there a reference list at the bottom?
 * 19) ** There is no references linked yet
 * 20) * Is each of those sources linked with a little number?
 * 21) ** There is no references linked yet
 * 22) * What is the quality of the sources?
 * 23) ** There is no references linked yet
 * 24) 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):
 * 25) * What changes do you suggest and how would they improve the article?
 * 26) ** The only suggestion i suggest on doing to this article is adding the sources to the bottom of the article
 * 27) ** Thanks!
 * 28) * 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?
 * 29) ** The article could use maybe a bit more detail before being ready for prime-time
 * 30) ** I'll add more details. Thank you for your feedback!
 * 31) What's the most important thing the author could do to improve the article?
 * 32) The most important thing is adding the sources
 * 33) Did you notice anything about the article you reviewed that could be applicable to your own article?
 * 34) I noticed that there is a few more topics/ subjects that is being talked about that I could possibly look into adding to my article