User:Kpaste/Dolabrifera dolabrifera/DonaldDuck808 Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?
 * KPaste
 * Link to draft you're reviewing:
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Kpaste/Dolabrifera_dolabrifera?veaction=edit&preload=Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template
 * Link to the current version of the article:
 * Dolabrifera dolabrifera - Wikipedia
 * Dolabrifera dolabrifera - Wikipedia

Evaluate the drafted changes
Please answer the following questions in detail addressed to the classmate whose article you are reviewing. Remember this is constructive feedback, so be polite and clear in your suggestions for improving their article. We are all working together to improve the Wikipedia pages for the amazing species.

Use a different font style (bold or italic) for your answers so it is easy for the author to see your comments!

Seeing that the existing article is only a few sentences, with little information. I will definitely fix that and organize the information better. I appreciate that :) I agree, the text would be more effective with a better use of scientific terms. I am not quite sure what you meant by this. I assume you mean that some of the sources had a lot of information? Thank you for your suggestions, I will try to improve on the use of scientific language and find more reliable sources with information. I will improve on the suggestions you have given. It is quite difficult to find sources pertaining to this species. Though I will try to search for more information. Thank you for your feedback, it will help me to better my article.
 * 1) First, what does the article do well? (Think about content, structure, complementing the existing article, writing, etc.)
 * 2) * Is there anything from your review that impressed you? Added a lot of new information
 * 1) Check the main points of the article:
 * 2) * Does the article only discuss the species the article is about? (and not the genus or family) Yes
 * 3) * Are the subtitles for the different sections appropriate? Subtitles could be improved. Change it to description, distribution, life cycle, habitat, etc. Right now it is "Article draft", "lead", and "body."
 * 1) * Is the information under each section appropriate or should anything be moved? There is unique information on each section, so it is good.
 * 1) * Is the writing style and language of the article appropriate? (concise and objective information for a worldwide audience) Could be more scientific. For instance, instead of saying "animal", say "species"
 * 1) Check the sources:
 * 2) * Is each statement or sentence in the text linked to at least one source in the reference list with a little number? Yes
 * 3) * Is there a reference list at the bottom? Yes
 * 4) * Is each of those sources linked with a little number? Yes
 * 5) * What is the quality of the sources? There are sources with paragraphs of information, as well as sources with mostly images. It is preferable to have sources with lots of information, as that can provide more ideas on things to write about.
 * 1) Give some suggestions on how to improve the article (think of anything that could be explained in more details or with more clarity or any issues addressed in the questions above):
 * 2) * What changes do you suggest and how would they improve the article? Just improve the grammar to be more "scientific" and make sure you have good quality sources, even though it can be difficult to find good sources.
 * 1) * Is the article ready for prime-time and the world to see on Wikipedia? If not, how could the author improve the article to be ready? It is not ready quite yet, just needs to improve on the already mentioned suggestions.
 * 1) What's the most important thing the author could do to improve the article? Look more into the species. Eventually, you will find more information that could make your article stronger.
 * 1) Did you notice anything about the article you reviewed that could be applicable to your own article? We both have some grammar mistakes, but I think we are on the right track. We have decent information. Overall, it is a good start.