User:Bmorg596/Nelson's woodrat/Nate1256 Peer Review

Peer review
This is where you will complete your peer review exercise. Please use the following template to fill out your review.

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing? (provide username) Bmorg596
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: The sandbox draft hasn't been created yet, so I'll add the link to the article instead. Nelson's woodrat

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer?
 * Not at the moment.
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Yes.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * No, because there is only one major section that is on the article.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * Information about the volcano slopes that it lives on.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * It's somewhat concise, but there isn't a lot of information on the article, because it's a stub.

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic?
 * Yes.
 * Is the content added up-to-date?
 * Yes.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * There is a lot of content that is missing, but that is only because Bmorg596 recently picked to do this article.

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral?
 * Yes.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * No.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * No.
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * No.

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Yes.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Yes.
 * Are the sources current?
 * Yes.
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * Yes.

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * The information that was added is well-written.
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * No.
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * There is only one section at the moment.

Images and Media
Guiding questions: If your peer added images or media


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * No.
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete?
 * The article is more complete, because there was hardly any information beforehand.
 * What are the strengths of the content added?
 * Bmorg586 added more information about the threats to the Nelson's woodrat.
 * How can the content added be improved?
 * By adding information about its description, diet, behavior, and what steps might be being taken to try to protect this animal.

Overall evaluation

 * The article is only a stub, so more information will be included once Bmorg596 collects more sources. It will be improved in the future.