User:Danielleharmon23/Sepioloidea pacifica/Megfennelly Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Danielleharmon23


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * Sepioloidea pacifica


 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Sepioloidea pacifica

Evaluate the drafted changes
Sorry about just doing your peer review now, I was checking on your sandbox draft not the actual article.

Lead:

The lead has an intriguing opening sentence, with a nicely developed couple of sentences following it. I would suggest maybe including in the lead a little bit about what you are going to be discussing further on within the article. Right now, the lead just talks about what the Sepioloidea pacifica is, but not much about what you're going to read within the article itself.

Content:

So far the only content in this article is the morphology section, including information about mantles and suckers. Each of these sections only have a sentence each, so I would definitely recommend adding more if possible. If not possible, I would add another section talking about their reproduction habits, their habitats, or anything else you can tell about the species.

Tone and Balance:

The information in the article is neutral and concise, and not written in hard to understand terms. However, all sections of the article do feel underdeveloped.

Images:

There is only one image of the species on the page. I would recommend adding a few more labelled images, maybe one of it eating? Or one of it swimming? Visuals can be great help in allowing the reader to visualize what they're reading about.

Sources and Resources:

There is a good amount of sources linked to this article, all by a variety of authors and the newest one being from 2021. All of the sources seem relevant to the provided information and relatively up to date. The couple of links that I clicked on worked and seemed reliable!