User:Destinycanoneo/Holothuria cinerascens/SamuelCaballero94 Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Destinycanoneo


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Destinycanoneo/Holothuria_cinerascens?veaction=edit&preload=Template%3ADashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template


 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Holothuria cinerascens

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.)
 * 2) * Is there anything from your review that impressed you?
 * 3) * Any turn of phrase that described the species in a clear way?
 * 4) * The article is very descriptive, as there is a wide variety of content. It complements the existing article very well as both article and sandbox draft have some similar info. The writing is all in one paragraph. Nothing really impressed me as I feel like the structure needs to be improved a lot. The sentence "Holothuria (Semperothuria) cinerascens is a species of sea cucumber in the family Holothuriidae." described the species in a clear way.
 * 5) Check the main points of the article:
 * 6) * Does the article only discuss the species the article is about? (and not the genus or family)
 * 7) * Are the subtitles for the different sections appropriate?
 * 8) * Is the information under each section appropriate or should anything be moved?
 * 9) * Is the writing style and language of the article appropriate? (concise and objective information for a worldwide audience)
 * 10) * The article does only discuss the species and not the genus or family. Destiny needs to add sub-titles to separate details to make it more neat and less clamped. Destiny should change her writing style, as there is a lot of info in a large paragraph. She should try list, add sub headings, etc to clean it up, but the grammar is fine.
 * 11) Check the sources:
 * 12) * Is each statement or sentence in the text linked to at least one source in the reference list with a little number?
 * 13) * Is there a reference list at the bottom?
 * 14) * Is each of those sources linked with a little number?
 * 15) * What is the quality of the sources?
 * 16) * Only one statement or sentence in the text is linked to at least one source, but not in the reference list. The sources are linked with a little number, however numbering starts at #3. There is a reference list at the bottom. The sources are good, they are different from the ones in the original article.
 * 17) 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):
 * 18) * What changes do you suggest and how would they improve the article?
 * 19) * 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?
 * 20) * I suggest to add subheadings like Description & Biology, Distribution & Habitat, Human Use, etc. Destiny also needs to seperate her information because as a reader, they may get bored at just staring at paragraphs. Also, they may get confused as info is all over the place. Sources should start at #1 and not #3. The article is not ready for prime-time and the world to see on Wikipedia because of all the things I listed above, basically it doesn't look done.
 * 21) What's the most important thing the author could do to improve the article? The most important thing the author could do to improve the article is to separate her info into sub-headings.
 * 22) Did you notice anything about the article you reviewed that could be applicable to your own article? I could potentially add images on my article to make it look more presentable and to make my audience have more knowledge into my species, especially after seeing what it looks like.