User:Jules Atticus/Attachment behaviour in wolves/Idm123 Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Jules Atticus


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:Jules Atticus/sandbox


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

Attachment behaviour in wolves

Hi Jules Atticus! I am having trouble determining what contributions you made. I see there is a sandbox draft with the section "Relationships with humans". This text also appears in the article that is currently published, with just a couple words changed. I am going to assume that you wrote this and do a peer review on this section. If this is not right, maybe you can reach out to Dr. Wilson and he can connect us so I can give you a review of what you have done. I would not want you to miss out just because the interface can be a little confusing sometimes.

Evaluate the drafted changes
In this first paragraph, I would suggest changing up the third and fourth sentences a little bit because they do not flow very well. Maybe try saying: For the first 1.5-2 months of their lives, the pups were with their caregivers for 24 hours a day. After this, time with their caregiver was reduced to 16 hours a day. The caregivers were responsible for feeding the pups. Cite this appropriately, of course, and feel free to put your own spin on the wording but I would advise a change to make it more concise.

Although your contribution was extremely informative overall, I feel like it might be a little wordy and include information that is not necessarily relevant. I would advice checking with Dr. Wilson or the TA's but I think that it might be more worthwhile to present only the results of the studies without going into as much detail about the methodology. Even just making the sentences more concise (like what I suggested above) might be enough to help with this. This only applies to the first two paragraphs. I thought the last paragraph had the perfect amount of methodological information to support the findings without becoming too focused on the study itself.

In terms of the tone, it was done well and did not seem to convince the readers of a certain perspective.

If there are any pictures available of humans working with wolves that seem relevant I think that would be an awesome addition to this section as well!