User:Mgr015/Lankanectes pera/Netasha8 Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Mgr015


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:Mgr015/Lankanectes pera


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

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.)

The article already has a lot of good information in it. The content is descriptive, relevant, and up to date. The content added is neutral and is non-persuasive. There are many sources and they each seem reliable and with abundant information. There are no links in the added content yet. The content is easy to read and concise, however it is choppy and, with a few small arrangements, could work more smoothly. It is broken up into clear sub-categories.

The content is strong in information, especially in the description section. With the focus on conservation, that is something that should be added a bit to the addition. Overall a very good article.