User:Lisa1235858/Versutoxin/Jneyyan Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Lisa1235858


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Lisa1235858/Versutoxin?veaction=edit&preload=Template%3ADashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)

Lead
Includes an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the topic. There is no brief description of the article's major sections. It also includes information that is not further explained in a later section. However, it is clear and concise!

Content
I think "history" needs to be renamed to reflect more about the spider, not the history of the toxin. Otherwise, all of the content so far is relevant to the topic. It is as up-to-date as it can be, and although the sections should be expanded more, it seems to cover a good range about the toxin - there really is not any content that seems to be missing.

Sources and References
Unfortunately your two references from Nature are only accessible through UCLA and therefore cannot be used (not open access).

However, all your other references look great from respected journals and peer reviewed - therefore your new article meets Wikipedia's Notability requirements. The references also include some sources from recent years, which is great. The links all work.

Organization
It's well written so far, and clear and concise - there are just a couple of grammar errors. I edited some, but look over the article when you are done to catch any more. The sections are broken down clearly and hits the main areas of the topic - only that the History section is a little misleading - it probably will be about the spider, not the toxin itself.

You can also add an "Applications" section for ways this toxin is used in research or other fields.

Images and Media
The tables and images look really professional and well-built, no improvement needed.

Overall impressions
I would say that the main improvement is for the sections to be expanded. Otherwise, this is a very good start to the article.