User:Itsjosiah.g/Achatinella concavospira/CanalesMar Peer Review

General info
itsjosiah.g
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing:User:Itsjosiah.g/Achatinella concavospira
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists):Achatinella concavospira

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 species native to Hawaii and for the World to meet.

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


 * 1) First, what does the article do well? (Think about content, structure, complementing the existing article, writing, etc.)
 * 2) * Is there anything from your review that impressed you?
 * 3) * This article had lots of information in the "about" section. They spoke in detail about the species.
 * 4) Check the main points of the article:
 * 5) * Does the article only discuss the species the article is about? (and not the genus or family)
 * 6) ** it describes the species, but they never brought up a family or genus
 * 7) * Are the subtitles for the different sections appropriate?
 * 8) ** yes
 * 9) * Is the information under each section appropriate or should anything be moved?
 * 10) ** everything is correct under each section
 * 11) * Is the writing style and language of the article appropriate? (concise and objective information for a worldwide audience)
 * 12) ** some of the grammar is incorrect
 * 13) Check the sources:
 * 14) * Is each statement or sentence in the text linked to at least one source in the reference list with a little number?
 * 15) ** about 2 sentences
 * 16) * Is there a reference list at the bottom?
 * 17) ** yes
 * 18) * Is each of those sources linked with a little number?
 * 19) ** some, not all.
 * 20) * What is the quality of the sources?
 * 21) ** three of the sources don't have actual links paired to them, and the other two aren't in the correct format used for the references section.
 * 22) 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):
 * 23) * What changes do you suggest and how would they improve the article?
 * 24) ** I would suggest to add the links in the references sections for easier access to the site. I would also suggest to add more sentences in the habitat and distribution sections.
 * 25) * Is the article ready for prime-time and the world to see on Wikipedia? If not, how could the author improve the article to be ready?
 * 26) ** It's not ready for the world to see on Wikipedia, yet! The author could add a lot more in each of the sections.
 * 27) What's the most important thing the author could do to improve the article?
 * 28) the most important thing would have to be to add the links in the references, and to fix the wording and grammar. For example it states, "nocturnal snails thar are endemic". Not too sure what "thar" is supposed to mean, so I would fix that.
 * 29) Did you notice anything about the article you reviewed that could be applicable to your own article?
 * 30) I noticed that in my article I didn't have all that much either, so one thing I could apply to my article would be to add more in my habitat sections too.