User:Elaw529/Dimorphotheca ecklonis/Ritup1212 Peer Review

General info
Elaw529/Dimorphotheca ecolonis
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing:User:Elaw529/Dimorphotheca ecklonis
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists):Dimorphotheca ecklonis

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.)

I don't see any crazy changes. I'm guessing you are working on rewording it and focusing on the grammar I guess. I would suggest adding more content to the article itself. I feel like the more I read more questions are arising than being answered. I can see that you worked on the lead and it seems pretty solid, however I feel like the things mentioned in the lead aren't being talked about in the article. There isn't enough content in the original to start with, so I know you have a lot to do and I understand that it's just a draft and that you're still working on it. I feel like tone is maintained like it's informative. I only see two references so maybe add more to make it creditable. It's not organized, like the information doesn't flow well. The two images look good and they do a good job at showing what the flower looks like.