User:Decampr/Clitoris/Pktka 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) @decampr
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: User:Decampr/sandbox

Lead evaluation
I'm assuming that the "general" section might be added to the lead in the full article? Unsure. I also know this article is contentious so I'm not sure if you will be able to update the lead, but the "general" section is a good overview.

Content evaluation
Yes, everything seems relevant to the topic at hand! All of the added content is very factual and detailed! Learned a lot just by reading this. Since you are only updating the non-human animals section of the page, this seems sufficient for sure. One constructive thing I would say is that I am not sure how important the exact numbers in the beginning of the "other mammals" section are - to a non-expert (me), it is just confusing and I am not quite sure what the point is. Additionally, some of the direct quotes you have used could probably be paraphrased for more seamless reading. Looking forward to reading your moles section too!! :)

Tone and balance evaluation
Everything is neutral and very factual. I do not see any claims that seem biased toward a particular position, unless people want to deny the complexity of reproductive biology.

Sources and references evaluation
All content is backed up, mostly by book chapters, so very reliable. The sources do seem thorough based on the knowledge I have on the topic. Most if not all sources are from 2005 onwards. This article seems like a well-rounded encyclopedia page for the animals in question!

Organization evaluation
I did not catch any grammatical or spelling errors. The only thing I can think of that would make this more concise would be to move more toward paraphrasing over direct quotations. The content is well-organized, and I can't wait to read more.

Images and media evaluation
The images included definitely do enhance understanding of the topic - I especially like the comparison of the male and female hyena genitals. I think for the image just of the hyena, maybe beginning with the title of "female spotted hyena" would make it even more clear. Yes, the images are laid out in a visually appealing way!

Overall evaluation
I think these are really great additions to the clitoris page! The lack of non-human animals on the other page is a massive gap in information, and your new 30+ sources are adding so much! The only thing I would say is to rely less heavily on direct quotes, but it is super clear that you are knowledgeable on the subject and have the proper scholars cited. The confusion of bringing in terms like A4 (still not sure what that is) without explaining could definitely be ameliorated by linking to relevant pages!