User:Kevin.vaughey/Chinese giant salamander/HarappanBoyz Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Kevin.vaughey


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:Kevin.vaughey/Chinese giant salamander


 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Chinese giant salamander

Lead

 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer? - No, but I feel the mechanism of feeding isn't the most pertinent information on the animal. Because of this, I think it's ok to do this at your own discretion.

Content

 * Is the content added relevant to the topic? - Yes!
 * Is the content added up-to-date? - Yes!
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? - Nope!

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral? - Yep! Neutral and informative.

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Does the content accurately reflect what the cited sources say? (You'll need to refer to the sources to check this.) - Yes. Very well abridged, as far as I can tell.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? - Yes.
 * Are the sources current? - Yes.
 * Check a few links. Do they work? - Yes.

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? - Some sentences can be broken down into smaller parts to make it easier for the reader. For example,"'On land the Chinese giant salamander captures its prey by biting it, they are missing a bone which usually lies along the upper cheek region of most salamanders, this gives them a much stronger bite force.'" This could be broken into:"'On land, the Chinese giant salamander captures its prey by biting it.  It is missing a bone which usually lies along the upper cheek region of most salamanders, giving them a much stronger bite force.'"By breaking up long sentences, it makes it easier to read.  It might help to think of it as "one idea per sentence".
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors? - Nope. Just a little wordy.
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? - Yes, each sentence brings forth a good amount of new information.

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete? - Yes! It fills in the gaps of what makes feeding possible for the animal.
 * What are the strengths of the content added? - It's very vivid and descriptive. I can imagine how the salamander eats in my head.
 * How can the content added be improved? - Readability is important. It might help to have a friend or someone else look at the text to pick up on what might be difficult to pick up on what I find to be readable.