User:Diqi Yan/Aurelia coerulea/Skeuwter Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

(provide username) Diqi Yan


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:Diqi Yan/Aurelia coerulea


 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * current article doesn't exist yet.

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.)

Lead

 * 1) The lead reflects the new information that was added, however it also mentions information that wasn't talked about in other parts of the article, that I think would be beneficial to talk about. For example you could talk about what pharmaceuticals has been made with the chemicals from the jellies, or maybe talk about the research going into that.
 * 2) The lead does include a good introduction sentence.
 * 3) The lead does include information on all of the major sections. This has lots of good information.
 * 4) The lead does include information that is not in other parts of the article. (see question 1 of this section)
 * 5) The lead is concise, but still very informative.

Content

 * 1) All of the content added was relevant and up to date.
 * 2) I believe that it would be good to talk more about how moon jelly population blooms affect humans, as well as how their chemical defenses could be of use.

Tone and Balance

 * 1) This article is unbiased and completely neutral, it contain concise and clear information on moon jellies.

Sources and References

 * 1) All new information is cited from reliable sources, and the information that was added reflects what the sources say accurately.
 * 2) The sources are current and thoroughly cover moon jellies.
 * 3) The links to the sources work except for 13, but I was able to find the article really easily via google scholar.

Organization

 * 1) There is a lot of good new content that is concise, clear, and well written, but there are some errors in the draft. In this, I am making suggestions for changes in bold. In the lead section, I would advise you to make the following changes to the second sentence, "This species is native to Japan, and they can also be found in coastal areas of China, Korea, California, the Mediterranean, and other temperate seas. They are particularly abundant in artificial habitats and sheltered regions." In the first sentence of the living habitat section there is a spelling error, I believe you meant to say that, "A.coerulea are weak swimmers, and they are mainly distributed in artificial constructions, as those structures can protect the polyps from being washed away." There is also another error in the second sentence, "A.coerulea polyps are more tolerant." There are some other minor styling things in the life cycle section that I would recommend changing. I'd recommend making the sentence where you are talking about reproduction in different temperatures into different sentences.
 * 2) Other than these small errors, the content is well organized.

Overall impressions

 * 1) The article does include some links to help its discovery, its sourced well, and its organized well, but it is still a draft. It has a set of errors that I would recommend fixing before publishing it.
 * 2) The article's content is concise, informative, and interesting, but I believe that it is missing some information about the moon jellies potential pharmaceutical applications.