User:EEEpidemiologist/Hendra virus/Rashaaasfour Peer Review

From what I am seeing, you have updated the table, with more recent information which I find really interesting, and I think that it is important information for you to be researching and adding to the article.

I also appreciate the update to the lead of the article, allowing the reader to know that there is a new Variant of hendra virus, that was found in 2021. I think that it is really interesting and once again information to be adding. However I still feel that the introduction of the article is not telling me enough about the hendra virus. As an unbiased reader, who is just interested in the article, there are a couple things that I would like defined in the introduction so I would be able to understand the rest of the article more clearly, such as what is a zoonotic disease, and how virulent the virus is. I am wanting just a little more information on the less scientific aspect of Hendra virus.

I do think that you kept a very scientific, professional unbiased tone throughout the article, and it matched the tone of the other information that is found throughout the information.

General info
(provide username)
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing:
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists):

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.)