User:FCollins95/Sex reversal/Mahodgen Peer Review

General info
(provide username) FCollins95 - Forrest Collins
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewingUser:FCollins95/Sex reversal
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)Sex reversal

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.)

The added content appears to be have an overall neutral tone. The content that has been added seems to be relevant and the information seems to be up to date. The information added seems to be new, helpful, and worth adding to the article. When reading the article and the edits, the sentences flow together well and the article is easy to read. The old and new information seems to be added in a well organized manner. There are no images that have been added, so there are no comments to add. Regarding the paper that was used to add the new information, I may be looking on the wrong page, but all I see from my end is "Look at Wibbels paper on how he was able to adjust temperature." I'm not sure how I can access the paper to look to see if the information is accurate. After adding the new edits, the article appears to be more complete. The strengths of the content added is that it provides more information on Temperature Sex Determination for reptiles. Not entirely sure how the content can be improved. Overall, the edits appear to be good quality.