User:GracefulGoat/West Indian manatee/Oac2113 Peer Review

Peer review
This is where you will complete your peer review exercise. Please use the following template to fill out your review.

General info

 * I am reviewing an article for Henry Landis (GracefulGoat)
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: User:GracefulGoat/sandbox

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer?
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?

==== The lead has been updated by my peer, specifically range information, and sensory information. The new information makes the lead more complete and helps summarize what will be addressed later in the article. I think it strikes a great balance of being concise, yet interesting and detailed enough. Amazing job here, Henry. ====

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic?
 * Is the content added up-to-date?
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?

==== I think your updates to the threats specific to each subspecies improves the article a lot. Also, it's great that you used new sources from like 2017, that means your information is current. However, I would like to see more information about how species and subspecies are different from one another if you're going to mention the new taxonomy and talk about the Florida and Antilean manatees. I also am wondering why you chose to include information about the other manatee species. ====

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral?
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?

'''I would say if any part of the article is non-neutral it would be the conservation section. That said, I don't think it's because of a bias or due to Henry trying to persuade people to support manatee conservation. I think it just comes across that way because manatees are facing a lot of threats and the section is very extensive.'''

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Are the sources current?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?

Images and Media
Guiding questions: If your peer added images or media


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?

For New Articles Only
If the draft you're reviewing is a new article, consider the following in addition to the above.


 * Does the article meet Wikipedia's Notability requirements - i.e. Is the article supported by 2-3 reliable secondary sources independent of the subject?
 * How exhaustive is the list of sources? Does it accurately represent all available literature on the subject?
 * Does the article follow the patterns of other similar articles - i.e. contain any necessary infoboxes, section headings, and any other features contained within similar articles?
 * Does the article link to other articles so it is more discoverable?

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete?
 * What are the strengths of the content added?
 * How can the content added be improved?

==== Honestly I think you did a great job. The biggest things are that you made the lead much better because it is more complete and you added a lot of updated information about the threats facing manatees. I guess my only piece of advice would be to try and focus more on just the West Indian manatee specifically. ====