User:Bksy4312/Cat pheromone/SwallowInTheTrees Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Bksy4312


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Bksy4312/Cat_pheromone?veaction=edit&preload=Template%3ADashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template


 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Cat pheromone

Evaluate the drafted changes
The lead section is decent. It is definitely way better than what was already there and it explains the basics of the topic pretty well. Personally I think you should outright remove the third sentence from the lead article, and remember to keep the lead focused on cat pheromones specifically. You do not have to explain what pheromones are in general, just in the way that it applies to cats. If your reader needs to know more about pheromones in general, you have already provided a link to where they can learn about it in general terms. I think when you write a lead section like this, in order to keep it concise and relevant to the specific topic you are presenting, it is okay to assume that people understand the concepts you are linking to. I think the second half of the lead has a good neutral tone and explains useful things about your topic. I think you don't need as many connectors (e.g. in particular, for instance) when writing for Wikipedia, but that may just be my personal preference. In general, just make sure the lead section is a clear summary of the article as a whole, and not much more.

The article is well-referenced with updated peer-review sources. You cite your fourth source a lot which is something to watch out for, but you provide extra citations sometimes which helps.

The first section of your article is good in my opinion. Not much more to say about it, it's just well done in tone, concision, and clarity. I may ext

I find some parts of your article are lacking concision. I would make sure you are giving enough information for the reader to understand the topic, but some parts of the article are longer than they need to be. For example, your section "Feline facial pheromone F3 synthetic analogue" is bigger than any individual paragraph in the old article, and I'm not sure all of the information presented in it is absolutely necessary for an overview on cat pheromones. It's not necessarily a bad thing. I don't know cat pheromones, and maybe the their synthesis is a bigger deal than I know. You clearly know a lot more about this stuff than I do, but I would go through the article and make sure everything in it is necessary for a reader that wants a basic understanding of cat pheromones.

Some sentences are a bit clunky. Don't be afraid to have simple clear sentences. In my opinion, a boring clear sentence on Wikipedia is worth more than several pretty ones that are difficult to decipher.

The actual facts presented in the article are excellent. They cover a wide variety of things related to cat pheromones and have definitely made me know a whole lot more about them.