User:DonJohnson101/Brazilian Institute of Environment and Renewable Natural Resources/Sidharth S Mahadeo Peer Review

General info
Don Johnson
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing:User:DonJohnson101/Brazilian Institute of Environment and Renewable Natural Resources - Wikipedia
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists):User:DonJohnson101/Brazilian Institute of Environment and Renewable Natural Resources - Wikipedia

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.)

The author has a brief and informative introduction that does add onto the original articles' introduction. The article does an excellent job of organizing the material into categories and gives a contemporary understanding of IBAMA's projects. The article uses a variety of reliable resources. The article provides information rather than opinions and is very neutral.

The reader will benefit from a brief history in the beginning of the article. Majority of the information given is within the last couple years although IBAMA has been around since 1989. The article would be stronger with a paragraph depicting IBAMA's general timeline. Additionally, in the Bolsanaro paragraph there is no introduction to the name Bolsanaro. You should use his full name and specify he was a former president.

The section on the Spix's Macaw is really niche information which I think is helpful is showing how special the work that IBAMA does is. If you can find more information on the different species that IBAMA works to protect, you can add a paragraph on the bottom detailing what and how IBAMA operates to ensure the protection of indigenous wildlife.