User:Kasarlo/Genetically modified animal/Mp6180 Peer Review

Peer review
This is where you will complete your peer review exercise. Please use the following template to fill out your review.

General info

 * I am reviewing the work of Kasarlo.
 * Link to draft: Genetically modified animal

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * The Lead could be further updated to reflect more clearly how an animal might be genetically modified (what natural/artificial methods?). In addition, the Lead could define what they constitute as an "animal;" talking about living organisms, or more specifically, microbes, mammals, reptiles, etc.
 * This sentence needs revision to be grammatically correct: "The vast majority of genetically modified animals are at the research stage with the number close to entering the market remains small." Maybe change to "The vast majority of genetically modified animals are still at the research stage, and the number that are even close to entering the market remains small." I think this shows the emphasis you were going for better? However, I think this sentence could be better used elsewhere and in the Lead you could focus more on what the article is going to talk about regarding the methodology of producing such organisms, and which organisms you are going to talk about.

Content
Guiding questions:


 * The content added was a source update to this article. I did not see any other added content from this author.
 * The content is up-to-date, but should be updated to reflect more of the reality of animal genetic modification today, through a larger scope view. Missing topics include: details regarding methodology, more details of how animals are genetically modified (what processes, etc.), ethical issues regarding the topic, how animals are selected, and maybe even delve into cloning.

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * The content is neutral, overall.
 * The mammals section is over represented in the article. Meanwhile, the amphibian section is under represented.
 * I think the content is too focused on the products of animal genetic modifications, and should include more content about the other aspects of this. In addition, the concept of unethical animal genetic modifications is not represented here at all.

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * The sources are plentiful and seem legitimate. This author clearly has put in a lot of effort into finding sources to cite, and the links I tried worked.

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * I think the overall organization is a good start to this article. I think the way it was split up into different animal groups provided a clear way for readers to navigate through the article if this was what they were looking for. However, I think there should be a larger section dedicated to the methodology of these genetic manipulations, and the different reasons should be clearly specified.
 * The overall tone was neutral, and grammar is overall good. However, there are small errors such as the aforementioned one in the Lead, and "first genetic engineers must isolated the gene" should use the "isolate" form of the verb.

Images and Media
Guiding questions: If your peer added images or media


 * The images of mammals add an interesting visual aspect for the reader. However, they should be included throughout the article with the different types of organisms presented to show a more full view of the topic.
 * The pig photograph should include more of a description: where is it? who made it? what does it do exactly? The caption for the chimeras or bull should be your guide.



Overall evaluation
Great work on this article! It's a really interesting topic and has a lot to work with. If you fix some grammatical issues and include more of other organisms to balance the information, as well as add some to the Lead to describe what you are going to talk about in the article, and add some information about the ethical issues in the topic, it would be much more well-rounded! You can do it!