User:KarolinaKaczmarski/Branchiostoma belcheri/KinsleyD Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

KarolinaKaczmarski


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


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

Evaluate the drafted changes
You have an extremely detailed and researched Wikipedia page already! Here’s some recommendations that may help.

-       Other than the title, it’s hard to grasp what you’re actually writing about just from the lead paragraph.

[It’s almost as if you’re writing a page about Branchiostoma specifically, and not your chosen lancelet. I don’t think the species name is even mentioned in the first paragraph which creates some confusion.]

-       In your lead paragraph/section, mention your species and where it can be found, maybe throw in a common name if it has one, and provide any information that sticks out about your particular species.

-       In “Anatomy and Morphology”, you focus a lot on what Chordates are, maybe try breaking the sentences up into multiple paragraphs: internal structure, external structure, movement and swimming, etc.

-       You could also just rely on linking the reader to the Chordata Wikipedia page, so you wouldn’t have to provide every miniscule detail yourself.

[You’ve done a lot of good research but try not to overwhelm the reader with a dump of knowledge. I think you did this perfectly in your “Distribution and Habitat” section, the information was given in several paragraphs from a broad use of sources.]

-       Your “Behavior” section may be better suited as a life cycle or development section given the detail on larval development and reproduction.

-       Add a template named “taxobox” to let the reader know what species and taxon list you’re writing about. It breaks up the writing and gives a simplified table to look at.

-       You’re already decent at linking to other Wikipedia pages, so omitting the explanation of a particular topic word is okay.

[For instance, I don’t think you need to explain “estuarine” or what the Chordata phylum is if you are linking the reader to them]

-       The use of headings throughout the page looks nice, too!

-       Throughout your reference list, there are incorrect date values, this also happened to my references. I think it’s just an error in how Wikipedia created the citation.

[Click the footnote number you want and edit the date manually. For example, reference 17 has a date of 2014-08, rewriting the date as August 2014 should correct the issue.]

-       Because of how often Branchiostoma and Chordata characteristics are mentioned, maybe add images portraying characteristics shared by your species. Some images may be found in the “Insert”, “Images and media” library. I believe all the images retrieved from there are free-to-use.

This article is pretty complete in terms of written material, you’ve done a great job!! You can probably ignore some of these suggestions, but I think they would provide a cleaner look for your page.

KinsleyD