User:Bksy4312/Cat pheromone/Teddyp1234 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
Lead

The lead of this article has been updated to include the new information provided by the student editor. It is also important to note that the editor provided a dramatic change to this article, by adding an immense amount of new information to develop this article. Comparing the before and after versions of the lead displays this perfectly, as the before lead consisted of just one simple sentence. The editor's draft updated the article lead to include all new relevant information and topics to be discussed further in the article. The instructions as to exactly how the editor has planned to edit and improve this article was clear and detailed, and placed at the beginning of the draft to help the peer editors understand their vision for the article. They did a great job informing the readers what was to be changed within their assigned article. In Bksy4312's draft, all information that they had planned to update within the article was added to the lead both clearly and concisely, without the use of any non-relevant information.

Content

All content added to the article was relevant to the topic of cat pheromones. The content added was very interesting and concise, and did not stray off the topic of cat pheromones. The information added to the feline facial pheromone section was well referenced and up-to-date. The editor picked up on content that was missing within this section and was able to strongly improve the content provided in this article. The editor also was keen to notice sections of the article that did not need improvement, the cat urine odourant section, and simply left those sections alone to avoid adding any unnecessary information to the article. Personally, I would label this article as an underrepresented topic, a fair assumption upon noting the lack of information provided within the article before editing, so this article does in fact deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps. I think the editor underwent a considerable effort to improve and address this article by researching the topic to provide relevant information to update this article with.

Tone and Balance

All updated content provided by the editor was done so in an unbiased way. This topic is in itself a neutral one, so it wouldn't be possible for the editor to persuade their readers in favour of one position or another, as it is simply stating facts about the topic. Under the "Feline facial and appeasing pheromones" section, the editor explains the five feline facial regions associated with the cat pheromone. One slight improvement that could be made within this section would be to address the chemical components that have been identified for regions F1 and F5, instead of just leaving these regions blank. The rest of the facial regions, F2-F4, went into detail about each specific function and sufficient information was provided for each region. This would be the only

"unbalanced" section found within the article.

Sources and References

All new content updated within the article is backed up with a reliable source. Upon inspection, all references added are scholarly journal articles or similar to the type, meaning it is fair to assume all references used are reliable sources of information. The information cited does match up with information to be found and talked about within each cited article, proving the editor did an effective job with researching their topic. The sources used are both thorough and current, meaning that they reflect accurate information and research that has been conducted fairly recently about the topic of cat pheromones. The vast list of references used include a diverse spectrum of authors that have researched the topic of the article. Given that these references are all scholarly articles, I think these sources would provide the most accurate and current information available for this topic. All links work and bring you directly to each cited article.

Organization

The editor had a clear plan prior to editing the article, which was outlined at the start of their draft. This was easy to tell while reading their draft, as the updated information was organized specifically into thought out headings and sub-headings that reflect the major points of the topic. The new information is easy to read and both well written and well researched. No grammatical or spelling errors are to be found.

Images and Media

An image is included within the draft, to help enhance the understanding of "bunting behaviour". The image is well captioned and placed in a suitable location that is nearby to where the relevant information is listed. It does adhere to Wikipedia's copyright guidelines, as if you hover over the image the correct reference is provided. It is laid out in a visually appealing way, without interfering with any information being provided within the article.

Overall Impressions

I think the chosen article has undergone considerable changes that as a result makes it more complete. It is clear that the editor did quite a lot of research on the chosen topic and understood the information that they presented to their readers. The editor understood which sections of their article to improve upon and which sections to leave as is. Overall, I found the content to be very interesting and the editor did a great job with organizing and presenting updated information within their article.