User:Kedwa39/Pterygoplichthys anisitsi/L$utigers Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Kedwa39


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Kedwa39/Pterygoplichthys_anisitsi?veaction=edit&preload=Template%3ADashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template

Evaluate the drafted changes

 * 1) First, what does the article do well? Is there anything from your review that impressed you? Any turn of phrase that described the subject in a clear way?

• It does well in explaining how the Pterygoplichthys anisitsi breathes when there is not a sufficient amount of oxygen in the water and the methods the Pterygoplichthys anisitsi go through in order to achieve sufficient oxygen for the body. I was impressed by the clarity of the author in stating what they were describing clearly and concisely. There was no turn of phrase that described the subject.

2. What changes would you suggest the author apply to the article? Why would those changes be an improvement?

• I would suggest the author to put more detail into the article about the gas exchange methods of the Pterygoplichthys anisitsi and to describe more about what exactly the Pterygoplichthys anisitsi is and where they reside. Also, the reference section for the sources needs to be redone in the correct format. It would improve the article in its clarity to reader on what exactly the Pterygoplichthys anisitsi is and why they possess this type of breathing adaptation and how it benefits them compared to other methods of gas exchange during times of low oxygen.

3. What's the most important thing the author could do to improve the article?

• The most important thing the author could do to improve the article is to describe more in detailed the method and importance of the Pterygoplichthys anisitsi’s gas exchange process.

4. Did you notice anything about the article you reviewed that could be applicable to your own article? If so, what?

• I did not notice anything in the article that could be applicable in my own article.

5. Are the sections organized well, in a sensible order? Would they make more sense presented some other way (chronologically, for example)? Specifically, does the information they are adding to the article make sense where they are putting it?

• The information presented in the article make sense and are coherent in the order the author put them in.

6. Is each section's length equal to its importance to the article's subject? Are there sections in the article that seem unnecessary? Is anything off-topic?

• Each section’s length is equal to its importance to the article’s subject and there is nothing off topic or unnecessary in the article.

7. Does the article draw conclusions or try to convince the reader to accept one particular point of view?

• The article does not draw conclusions or try to convince the reader to accept one particular point of view.

8. Are there any words or phrases that don't feel neutral? For example, "the best idea," "most people," or negative associations, such as "While it's obvious that x, some insist that y."

• There is neither non-neutral or negative association type of language present in the article.

9. Are most statements in the article connected to a reliable source, such as textbooks and journal articles? Or do they rely on blogs or self-published authors?

• All statements except for one sentence is connected to a source. But determining whether the source is reliable or not is unclear since the author and journal of where the source came from is not found in the source’s citation in the reference section.

10. Are there a lot of statements attributed to one or two sources? If so, it may lead to an unbalanced article, or one that leans too heavily into a single point of view.

• Every sentence in the article is attributed to different sources, so there is no unbalanced representation in the article.

11. Are there any unsourced statements in the article, or statements that you can't find stated in the references? Just because there is a source listed, doesn't mean it's presented accurately!

• The only statement that is unsourced is the first sentence but all the other sentences have a source connected to it and is listed in the reference section. However, the sources are not presented correctly since the citation are not in the right format.