User:Ktjylee/Ecosystem engineer/Mari2132 Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Ktjylee - Ecosystem engineer


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:Ktjylee/Ecosystem engineer


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

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.)

General


 * 1) Good headings that truly capture the topic and the paragraphs are well written with many sources.
 * 2) A table of Cases of Ecosystem Engineers - well organized & great info. (Not sure it you made it yourself, if not its a good addition).  Wish to have added more images to my article.
 * 3) Some parts in the paragraphs and some whole paragraphs are bolded, is there a reason for that or an error?

Lead & Content


 * 1) Leads are very good, right to the point and reflect exactly what that part is going to be apart.
 * 2) The content is relevant to the topic, mainly focusing what and why eco-engineers are important but are controversial.
 * 3) Love the focus on humans and their effects on ecosystems and how humans have displaced animals and became their own ecosystem engineers.

Tone & Balance


 * 1) Writing seems to be pretty neutral and not bias.  However, it does include some phases that make it seem as a societal generalization that they are discussing/bring up to talk more about the topic.
 * Ex:" Humans are thought to be one of" . I do think while this can be seen an opinion, this is formed in a way that does not give bias views but a generalization.

Sources


 * 1) A great amount of sources used, 11 in total and they were all cited and put in the reference section.
 * 2) Sources back up their claims/topics and the writing reflects the accurate sources.

Organization


 * 1) I think the classification and Introduced species as eco-engineers could have been right after the importance portion. This will give a good structure in terms of giving a well rounded explanation of what, how, and why there are ecosystem engineers.   Then going into problems surrounding ecosystem engineers, such as the controversy and then how humans are involved.
 * 2) Although I'm not sure how you will organize it within the actual article, which then I would be wrong about this part.

Images


 * 1) Great images that do add to the understanding of ecosystem engineers.  A table of the types of ecosystem-engineers to explaining  the differences giving examples. And then the Gordon Dam as a reference to humans role in being a ecosystem engineer.

Overall impressionsOverall great additions to the the ecosystem engineers conversation and this article.