User:Elewis3/Partulina proxima/Jazellel Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?  Elewis3
 * Link to draft you're reviewing:
 * User:Elewis3/Partulina proxima
 * Link to the current version of the article:
 * Partulina proxima
 * Partulina proxima

Evaluate the drafted changes
Please answer the following questions in detail addressed to the classmate whose article you are reviewing. Remember this is constructive feedback, so be polite and clear in your suggestions for improving their article. We are all working together to improve the Wikipedia pages for the amazing species.

Use a different font style (bold or italic) for your answers so it is easy for the author to see your comments!


 * First, what does the article do well? (Think about content, structure, complementing the existing article, writing, etc.)
 * I'm impressed the way you organize your draft, I can see you've added notes for yourself. That's a good way to remember and keep track of information and due dates. I haven't gotten that far into writing about my mollusk' anatomy, props to you. I agree, its hard to find information, you got this !
 * Check the main points of the article:
 * Great job, I can see you have many main points relating to your mollusk.
 * Check the sources:
 * Your sources seem alright, just need to input them in Wikipedias format.. Make sure you have all the correct sources for your information :D
 * Give some suggestions on how to improve the article (think of anything that could be explained in more details or with more clarity or any issues addressed in the questions above):
 * Make sure that your mollusk' name is italicized before adding it to the actual Wikipedia article :D
 * You can try changing the heading, right now its the same size as the other text.. Try changing it to subheading (at the top of your toolbar.)
 * If its easier for you, try citing the information with the "citations" tool at the top. It was easier for me to input it into my final draft I'm currently working on... And it helps organize things efficiently.
 * What's the most important thing the author could do to improve the article?
 * Just make minor changes to headings and sources, also adding more information would be great.
 * Did you notice anything about the article you reviewed that could be applicable to your own article?
 * I could definitely add more information about anatomy and morphology.