User:Hpayne4/Sheepshead minnow/Snowr23 Peer Review


 * 1) First,     what does the article do well? Is there anything from your review that     impressed you? Any turn of phrase that described the subject in a clear     way?

The article is very well thought out and the sections are placed in a clear way. One thing that impressed me was how detailed the description of the fish is.


 * 1) What     changes would you suggest the author apply to the article? Why would those     changes be an improvement?

I think that the author could change the article by figuring out a way to combine the “Uses” article into another section because it just feels out of place. This would be an improvement to those wanting quick information on this species and not having to read one sentence for one whole section.


 * 1) What's     the most important thing the author could do to improve the article?

I think that they could update the behavior and the distribution and habitat as those two sections seem to be the most in need of some information added to them.


 * 1) Did     you notice anything about the article you reviewed that could be     applicable to your own article? If so, what?

My own article needs to be organized and set up into sections.


 * 1) Are     the sections organized well, in a sensible order? Would they make more     sense presented some other way (chronologically, for example)? Specifically, does the information     they are adding to the article make sense where they are putting it?

Yes, the sections are organized well and make sense. Yes, the information they are adding to the article makes sense where they are putting it.


 * 1) Is     each section's length equal to its importance to the article's subject?     Are there sections in the article that seem unnecessary? Is anything     off-topic?

No, I wouldn’t think that each section’s length equals the importance of it to the article’s subject. I think that the uses section could be combined into another section because it is a small section.


 * 1) Does     the article draw conclusions or try to convince the reader to accept one     particular point of view?

No, it just provides the information in a clear and concise manner that makes sense for Wikipedia.


 * 1) Are     there any words or phrases that don't feel neutral? For example, "the     best idea," "most people," or negative associations, such     as "While it's obvious that x, some insist that y."

I did not find any words or phrases that don’t feel neutral.


 * 1) Are     most statements in the article connected to a reliable source, such as     textbooks and journal articles? Or do they rely on blogs or self-published     authors?

Most of the statements in the article are connected to a reliable source.


 * 1) Are     there a lot of statements attributed to one or two sources? If so, it may     lead to an unbalanced article, or one that leans too heavily into a single     point of view.

There are only 5 references but they all seem to add the article in an even manner.


 * 1) Are     there any unsourced statements in the article, or statements that you     can't find stated in the references? Just because there is a source     listed, doesn't mean it's presented accurately!

No, I did not find any unsourced statements in the article.