User:Keburt/Calming signals/Casually Anonymous Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Keburt


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:Keburt/calming signals draft


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

Evaluate the drafted changes
The lead of the draft is very informative on the topic. Unlike the article, you stated what calming signals are, which I believe is very crucial to have. While reading the lead, I found it very informative and reflects upon the important information regarding calming signals. The only thing that sticks out about the lead would be the last sentence in the firs paragraph. It does not seem to flow with the previous sentences. But overall, the lead you have written is a great improvement to the article.

The format of the draft is well organized. I like how the history is presented followed by the types/examples of calming signals. When reading the interaction portions, I then have a better understanding of the cues that would be displayed. Although, the last sentence in the Dog-Human Interactions section is too long, and needs to be shortened or made into multiple sentences.

I am glad you have removed the cue descriptions in your draft. when reading the published article, sentences like "Licking is a signal that is used often, especially by black dogs, dogs with a lot of hair around their faces, and others whose facial expressions are more difficult to be seen than those of dogs with lighter colors, visible eyes and long noses," seemed very redundant to have. I also noticed your information is not heavily weighted on a singular source and have distributed others into your paragraphs. This is definitely a great improvement, or it would basically just be a synopsis of that one resource. You also kept the information neutral. For example, using "Other canine behaviourists," over most canine behaviourists displays the neutrality of your draft.

All your sources are reliable and peer reviewed which is great. And all information provided is properly cited.

Great article draft!