User:Jordanviv02/Hummingbird/Glabor5 Peer Review

Peer review
This is where you will complete your peer review exercise. Please use the following template to fill out your 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 edit does well in adding valuable knowledge of the hummingbird’s vocal organ. “Song and vocal learning” is already a subtopic of the article, and this information compliments and enhances that section well.'''


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

'''I think the author intended for this edit to be a whole new section within the article. However, the author would be better suited to include this information under the already existent “Song and vocal learning” section because this information is relevant to that area.'''


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

There are some obviously grammatical errors that need to be improved as well as changes in sentence structuring to make the information more concise.


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

'''This article edit referred to specific organs that have been effected by adaptation. I could improve my explanation of adaptation by referring the organs involved.'''


 * 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?

'''It was unclear where the author planned on placing the information. I am recommending that it is placed under subsection “Song and vocal learning”.'''


 * 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?

'''The length is appropriate and on topic. It is great that the syrinx is its main focus because it rarely referred to in other parts of the article.'''


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

No, it is neutral.


 * 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."

'''Not really. “What sets…apart” might be considered biased. Almost as if you are placing the hummingbird on a pedestal.'''


 * 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?

Both sources are reliable scientific articles.


 * 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.

No


 * 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!

Every statement is accurately sourced.