User:Cnevange/Calotomus zonarchus/SujitraN Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Cnevange


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Cnevange/Calotomus_zonarchus?veaction=edit&preload=Template%3ADashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)Calotomus zonarchus
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)Calotomus zonarchus

Evaluate the drafted changes
Please answer the following questions in detail addressed to the classmate whose article you are reviewing. Remember this is constructive feedback, so be polite and clear in your suggestions for improving their article. We are all working together to improve the Wikipedia pages for the amazing species.

Use a different font style (bold or italic) for your answers so it is easy for the author to see your comments!


 * 1) First, what does the article do well? (Think about content, structure, complementing the existing article, writing, etc.) The article is really well written, all the information for each heading such as "Human use, description, etc" are all in there with well-written responses and credited sources down below
 * 2) * Is there anything from your review that impressed you? I'm impressed by how many sources the author used and how well-written it was.
 * 3) * Any turn of phrase that described the species in a clear way? That it has cultural significant to Hawaiians, "Hawaiian would hunt and fish for cultural practices."
 * 4) Check the main points of the article:
 * 5) * Does the article only discuss the species the article is about? (and not the genus or family) The article only has information about the species, without sidetracking they didn't include the genus or family.
 * 6) * Are the subtitles for the different sections appropriate? Yes, everything is related to learning about the species.
 * 7) * Is the information under each section appropriate or should anything be moved? Everything is appropriate, and they have even put in extra sections.
 * 8) * Is the writing style and language of the article appropriate? (concise and objective information for a worldwide audience) Yes, appropriate language and easy to understand. No run-on sentences that could confuse me.
 * 9) Check the sources:
 * 10) * Is each statement or sentence in the text linked to at least one source in the reference list with a little number? No, I don't see any links to any of the sentences they have stated.
 * 11) * Is there a reference list at the bottom? Yes.
 * 12) * Is each of those sources linked with a little number? No, but they are listed in alphabetical.
 * 13) * What is the quality of the sources? A good quality, everything is well written and easy to understand. I have learned so much from the articles.I like how they used so many different sources to provide clarity to the research. it must've taken awhile and they have done a great job.
 * 14) Give some suggestions on how to improve the article (think of anything that could be explained in more details or with more clarity or any issues addressed in the questions above): Include links to the articles of each statement they have made.
 * 15) * What changes do you suggest and how would they improve the article? They have to go back to theri sandbox and add references to each statement they have made because without the reference there is no credible source and it's a whole bunch of meaning less words since they can easily make it up.
 * 16) * Is the article ready for prime-time and the world to see on Wikipedia? If not, how could the author improve the article to be ready? Yes and no. Yes because the article is well written however, it needs references to their statement.
 * 17) What's the most important thing the author could do to improve the article? Add in their references to their statements as stated before and fix any errors they might've found that I didn't.
 * 18) Did you notice anything about the article you reviewed that could be applicable to your own article? The types of articles they used. I struggled to find articles for my species so seeing that they found so many, and looking it at it, it gives me more of an idea of what to search to find my information. Not only that but the extra sections they put like the threat.