User:Elizlilyd/Fender's blue butterfly/Kamur93 Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Elizlilyd


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

Lead
The lead was not updated by the author. However, the author significantly expands upon the article by including the following sections: Ecology, Habitat Destruction, and Conservation. These sections are crucial and extremely relevant to the topic. Furthermore, these sections expand upon the lead section by providing contextual information about the ecology and biology of the Fender's blue butterfly.

Content
As mentioned previously, the sections added to the article are extremely relevant to the topic and useful in explaining conservation efforts to address the endangered status of these butterflies. The section on ecology provides information about the organism's life-history, which is closely intertwined with the facultative mutualistic relationship with its host plant. This section also provides information on the geographical and temporal distribution of the butterfly. This section provides readers with contextual background leading to the root cause of the butterfly's classification of endangered species. The next section following this topic was habitat destruction. The author does a wonderful job explaining the native habitat and endemism of the butterfly, which provides contextual information about their vulnerability to potential extinction. Moreover, this section on habitat destruction could be further expanded to include information about its host plant, which I presume is also impacted by habitat fragmentation. Furthermore, I think it would be interesting to provide a section on the butterfly's vulnerability to climate change, if possible. Finally, the section on conservation is effectively summarized. However, it could be further expanded based on updates from conservation efforts to increase the butterfly's population.

Tone and Balance
Overall, the article had a consistent formal and neutral tone. The author does a great job establishing an objective tone, which is well-balanced throughout the article. The article scored high on clarity and neutrality, which is allows for the effective dissemination of objective information to the general audience.

Sources and References
The sources cited throughout this article ranged between 1998-2020. After reviewing the sources, I can confirm that they are credible and relevant to this article. All in-text citations were properly cited. In total, the author provided 11 new and diverse sources.

Organization
The article was easy to read and follow along. The sections were clearly and accurately labeled to reflect the content. The use of transition words and organization of content aided in the readability and clarity of the article. In general, there was little to no grammatical and spelling errors.

Images and media
The author did not provide any new images and media.

Expansion from current article
Compared to the current article, the article drafted by this author significantly expands on the content originally provided. The original article only had a lead section, which provided general information about the Fender's blue butterfly. However, the sections provided by this author further expands on the ecology and conservation status of this species.

Overall impressions
To sum, I think this is a well-rounded article. The readability and clarity makes it accessible to the general audience readers. I think the introduced sections is extremely important and relevant to the current article. Great job!