User:KLeal14/Nerita polita/NoahKealii Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

KLeal14


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:KLeal14/Nerita_polita?veaction=edit&preload=Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template


 * Link to the current version of the article
 * Nerita polita

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.) The article did well at giving a brief overview of the species.
 * 2) * Is there anything from your review that impressed you?
 * 3) ** I like how the detail in the article
 * 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)
 * 6) * Yes, the article does only discuss the species that the article is about and not the family
 * 7) * Are the subtitles for the different sections appropriate?
 * 8) * There is not any subtitles for each section to help direct me to what topic I'm looking at
 * 9) * Is the information under each section appropriate or should anything be moved?
 * 10) * Yes
 * 11) * Is the writing style and language of the article appropriate? (concise and objective information for a worldwide audience)
 * 12) * Yes the language are appropriate
 * 13) Check the sources:
 * 14) * Is each statement or sentence in the text linked to at least one source in the reference list with a little number?
 * 15) * No
 * 16) * Is there a reference list at the bottom?
 * 17) * Yes
 * 18) * Is each of those sources linked with a little number?
 * 19) * No
 * 20) * What is the quality of the sources?
 * 21) * The sources seem to be of decent quality.
 * 22) 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):
 * 23) * What changes do you suggest and how would they improve the article?
 * 24) * Fix the article and references with little number
 * 25) * 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?
 * 26) * No, need to add more details and edit some error for the reference and little numbers
 * 27) What's the most important thing the author could do to improve the article? - details and a proper references section.
 * 28) Did you notice anything about the article you reviewed that could be applicable to your own article? - I noticed there is a lot of good information that is added to the article and I believe I can Add more details to my article as well.