User:Cfb49840/Methanobacterium/Simonahall2003 Peer Review

General info
User:Cfb49840
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing:User:Cfb49840/Methanobacterium
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists):Methanobacterium

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 what feedback looks like.)

Overall, I think this article is very well done. The organization is clear and makes sense. It is very concise with not much irrelevant or additional information. Thant being said, I'm confused about the relevance of "for instance, they lack peptidoglycan in their cell walls" in the opening paragraph. It doesn't seem very relevant and I am not seeing it mentioned again in the article. Additionally, the lead does not include a preview of the articles major sections. it is on the edge of being too concise. Instead of being a paragraph it is more just a list of facts. I can tell where the article has been edited because many of the words are not showing up as blue meaning the word has a definition. additionally, where it has been edited is is easier to read and less like a list of facts.