User:LydBo/Gonatus onyx/Oeys24 Peer Review

General info
LydBo, Ahoog11, Skiah12
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:LydBo/Gonatus_onyx?veaction=edit&preload=Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists):Gonatus onyx

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.)


 * 1) First, what does the article do well? Is there anything from your review that impressed you? Any turn of phrase that described the subject in a clear way? The article does a great job at organizing  information in a digestible manner. The group mentioned they wanted feedback on how the wording would affect non-biologists' understanding on the article, and it seems like the writing is very clear and concise.  If anything, the only part that I could see being a little confusing to "non-science" people is how some sections of the article are grouped by source rather than by topic.
 * 2) What changes would you suggest the author apply to the article? Why would those changes be an improvement? Reorganizing certain parts of the article to be grouped by topic rather than source could be beneficial!
 * 3) What's the most important thing the author could do to improve the article? ^ same answer as above.
 * 4) Did you notice anything about the article you reviewed that could be applicable to your own article? Let them know! N/A