User:Joh19094/Beggiatoa/Fuchs190 Peer Review

General info
Joh19094
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:Joh19094/Beggiatoa
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Beggiatoa

Evaluate the drafted changes
I am assuming that the lead has not been updated, since it is not included in your sandbox. Although if you are just updating the article, I am not sure the lead will need to be updated, since you did not add any new sections.

The content added is relevant to the topic and up-to-date. I am not sure if you should include the genome size of the bacteria, as it seems to differ with strain (as you mention when you cite different strains). I also think that metabolic pathways could be omitted from this section, as they don't really seem connected to genetics in my opinion. I would move your last paragraph about gliding movement with filaments to after the paragraph that begins with "narrow filaments," since these two seem connected. I would expand on the polyhydroxybutyrate and polyphosphate granules, as this seems to be a distinctive morphological feature. Finally, the topic doesn't really address Wikipedia's equity gaps, but I'm not sure if that would be relevant in this case.

The content added seems neutral. Claims in the section I read seemed biased towards the idea that these bacteria are always motile. Is this the case? I think this point could benefit from some expansion.

This draft is missing references. There is not one claim that is referenced. I think this needs to be addressed such that all claims are supported by sources.

Added content is well-written (concise, clear, and easy to read). The only sentence that was a little unclear to me was the one in which you use "between 40 and 42 mol%," as it is unclear what "mol%" means. I would make this clearer and avoid using abbreviations (mol). I did not find any grammatical or spelling errors. The new content is broken down into sections that make sense and seem relevant to the topic.

No images or media were added.

Overall, a great first draft with information that will improve this article. I would prioritize cleaning up the first paragraph under the "Genetics" section and adding references throughout, amongst some other small edits.