User:Jsmartzz/Thick finger coral/Liezel Lagat Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Jsmartzz


 * Link to draft you're reviewing:
 * User:Jsmartzz/Thick finger coral
 * Link to the current version of the article:
 * Thick finger coral

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 the amazing species.

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? I really liked how much this person had a lot of information for the species classification and distribution areas. I also liked how they had a various amount of sections to talk about different information.
 * 3) * I used the species classification as a way to describe the species because there is little no information about this species which makes it difficult to find related information specifically. I also implemented sections first to utilize as more of an outline.
 * 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) No, this person mentions about the kingdom this species belongs too and also names other species that can be found in the same family.
 * 6) * I utilized information about the kingdom and other species within the same genus because there is no information about the specific species however, I'm going to try and utilize only species-specific information.
 * 7) * Are the subtitles for the different sections appropriate? Yes, they are appropriate. They are appropriate but I will try to condense them.
 * 8) * Is the information under each section appropriate or should anything be moved? I think the information about the other species found in the same family could be removed from the classification section. Noted, i will also try to remove the information on the taxaconomy without the removal of the information about the species that comes with it.
 * 9) * Is the writing style and language of the article appropriate? (concise and objective information for a worldwide audience) Yes, the writing style is appropriate and objective, non-biased.
 * 10) Check the sources:
 * 11) * Is each statement or sentence in the text linked to at least one source in the reference list with a little number? Only a few statements were linked to a source in the reference list. I will ensure that all information has a cited source.
 * 12) * Is there a reference list at the bottom? Yes, there is. This person has 5 references listed.
 * 13) * Is each of those sources linked with a little number? Yes, each source is linked with a number.
 * 14) * What is the quality of the sources? The quality is good. This person has at least 2 book sources. Also it seems like their sources came from reliable websites and articles. - I will try to improve on the sources and find more specific species information.
 * 15) 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):
 * 16) * What changes do you suggest and how would they improve the article? I suggest taking out talking about different species that are involved in the same family and taking out the information that talks about the organisms kingdom. I will take out the information discussing different species within the same family but I'm afraid this will provide for less information or description of the actual species because almost no information exists describing the specific species.
 * 17) * 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? No, I don't think this article is ready to be published. They still need to fill out information in some of their subsection areas. I plan on filling out the other sections and providing more information.
 * 18) What's the most important thing the author could do to improve the article? Focus mainly on the species the article is talking about and give more information in the subsections. I'm going to find more species specific sources and provide the information for the subsections.
 * 19) Did you notice anything about the article you reviewed that could be applicable to your own article? I noticed I could add in a reproduction section to my article to help add more information on how they grow.

Very helpful, thank you!