User:Joeadunlap/Evolution of Cryptobiosis/Zafallen Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

User: Joeadunlap


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:Joeadunlap/Evolution of Cryptobiosis


 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * User:Joeadunlap/Evolution of Cryptobiosis

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.)

Everything present in the article was relevant to the topic. The lead section was clear and flowed nicely into the introduction. The table of contents was in a logical order, and all sections added value to the article. The article is written in a neutral tone and does appear to have any biased. All facts were supposed by appropriate citations and there isn't any missing information any section and all references are from unbiased credible sources with links that work. The use of the photographs were a nice touch and gave the reader a clear visual of the organisms. I would like to see a section on how the knowledge of cryptobiosis could lead the application of the things that were suggested in the lead section. I think that would give this article more significance, but isn't required.