User:Jpyle02/Myxobolus cerebralis/C.bellavance20 Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Jpyle02


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Jpyle02/Myxobolus_cerebralis?veaction=edit&preload=Template%3ADashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template


 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Myxobolus cerebralis

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.)

Firstly, the way your paragraphs are composed are neat and easy to read. The choice of bolding some terms also allows for a better flow, however some of the bold is a bit distracting, and (just my suggestion) it may be more neat looking if only terms were bolded instead of big chunks of sentences. I also noticed as far as citations go (which you made note of) the in text citations are missing, so it's important to remember to add those once you're ready to publish it. The same goes for "References", which I couldn't evaluate because there's nothing included there. I only noticed one grammatical error, where it says, "This complex lifecycle involved Myxobolus cerebralis to have two different host," when it should say "two different hosts" plural. The rest of the misspellings are underlined in red, which I'm assuming you would fix before finalizing. Other than that, you've managed to pull a lot of information together quite nicely. I think another thing you could add is just a summarizing title before each paragraph that explains what they are about, e.g. "Taxonomy" or something along those lines. Everything is seemingly neutral, including the topic under review.