User:Cbm018/Sunflower sea star/Ghm007 Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Cbm018


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * Sunflower sea star


 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Sunflower sea star

Evaluate the drafted changes
(Compose a detailed peer review here, considering each of the key aspects listed above if it is relevant. Consider the guiding questions, and check out the examples of whafeedback looks like.)

Lead:

The lead effectively introduces the reader to the topic and the article and summarizes key aspects of the article in a concise manner. The lead provides a table of contents that can allow the reader to jump to any section they see as the most relevant to them. The lead does contain some information not seen in other parts of the article, such as the number of limbs.

Content:

The content provided in this article is relevant and largely up to date, with just a few sources from 2007 and 2003. I don't think there is any content that doesn't belong, but depending on the sources available, there could be some more information to be added. The article is C class and low importance, but it is listed as a level 5 vital article in Biology, Animals.

Tone and Balance:

The content added seems to be largely neutral and unbiased and it does not seem to sway a reader's opinion one way or another. Overall, this article seems very factual and not based in opinion at all.

Sources and References:

There are 15 sources on this Wikipedia article and google scholar lists over 22,000 sources related to this topic. These may not all be the best sources, but statistically there must be at least a few more that could be added. I clicked on a few sources and some did not have any link available and another one led me to a "404 page not found" message.

Organization:

The information is very factual and well organized into distinct categories. The sentence structure is a little bit simple, but this is probably a positive thing as it is easy to read and highly factual. I did not notice any spelling errors or grammatical errors.

Images and Media:

This article has multiple pictures of the species, two of the three photos have thorough descriptions. The other photo is above the taxonomic classification and the caption is the name of the species. I did notice there is an external link at the bottom for the photos, so these are well cited.

Overall impressions:

This article is over halfway complete, and is labeled to be an article that should be improved upon if possible. The content in this article is very factual and relevant to the topic. Although this article is well developed and well written, it may not hurt to check and see if there are any other sources with additional information to add to the article.