User:Kirklandcb/Caatinga parakeet/NickMcCo Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Kirklandcb


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


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

Evaluate the drafted changes
(Compose a detailed peer review here, considering each of the key aspects listed above if it is relevant. Consider the guiding questions, and check out the examples of what feedback looks like.)

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer?
 * The updated lead reflects the new content.
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * The lead is rather lengthy but does contain useful formation.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * The lead is not brief but is actually rather lengthy.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * Some information about the article is not present such as the illegal selling of the Caatinga parakeet as a pet.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * The Lead is somewhat overly detailed.
 * Some information about the article is not present such as the illegal selling of the Caatinga parakeet as a pet.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * The Lead is somewhat overly detailed.
 * The Lead is somewhat overly detailed.

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic?
 * The content added provides new information on the Caatinga parakeet.
 * Is the content added up-to-date?
 * The content is up to date and uses articles that have been created within the past five years.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * There was some content in the lead that did not belong, but overall in the passage there was no missing content.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * There was some content in the lead that did not belong, but overall in the passage there was no missing content.

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral?
 * The content added is neutral and unbiased.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * There are no biased claims that were in the article.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * All viewpoints were equally represented throughout the article.
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * The content does not try to persuade the reader in any way.
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * The content does not try to persuade the reader in any way.
 * The content does not try to persuade the reader in any way.

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * The sources are reliable and relevant.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * The sources are thorough and reflect literature on the Caatinga parakeet.
 * Are the sources current?
 * Sources are current.
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * All of the links work.
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * All of the links work.
 * All of the links work.

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * The content is clear and easy to read, but does not go too in depth.
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * No apparent errors.
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * The content is broken down into easy to read sections.
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * The content is broken down into easy to read sections.

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete?
 * The content added improves the overall quality. The addition of the new material provides new knowledge to the article.
 * What are the strengths of the content added?
 * The strengths include the addition of subspecies allows for greater general knowledge of the specie. The addition of the environment provides more content about the nature of the parakeet.
 * How can the content added be improved?
 * More details could be added the conservation, but overall, the article is good as a whole.
 * How can the content added be improved?
 * More details could be added the conservation, but overall, the article is good as a whole.