User:Dylchar/Dusky Canada goose/JasmineSandoval26 Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

I am reviewing Dylchar's article.


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:Dylchar/Dusky Canada goose
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)

Evaluate the drafted changes
Lead


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? The lead does include an introductory sentence that clearly describes the topic of the article and helps the transition to the rest of the article.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? The lead is concise and gives a good idea of what will be talked about next.

Content


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic? The content that is added to the article is very relevant including the size, color, behavior, etc. are crucial to differentiating the subspecies of the Canada goose.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? If I am not mistaken I didn't see what the diet of the dusky Canada goose was.

Tone and Balance


 * Is the content added neutral? The tone is very neutral and seems unbiased. The tone is simply informative.

Sources and References


 * Are the sources current? Yes the sources are current as one of them is as recent as 2022.
 * Check a few links. Do they work? The links within the article do work, however links are not provided in the bibliography.

Overall Impressions


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete? The content does improve the overall quality of the article because it informed more about restoration efforts that are being made towards the dusky Canada goose that was not previously mentioned. The information also helps the reader know about the predation upon the species.
 * How can the content added be improved? The content added is great! I would say the only thing that would improve the article is just to add more!