User:Mkarasik/Burmese python/Samsmith428 Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Mkarasik


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:Mkarasik/Burmese python
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Burmese python

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) What does the article do well? Impressive points?
 * 2) * Your scientific writing skill is clear to me. You are able to remain neutral and clearly word concepts without sounding too overdone or too simple. Your additions to the existing sections are helpful to the overall article. I especially believe the digestion information was great.
 * 3) Suggested changes? Why?
 * 4) * I know that places like thailand, vietnam, china, and indonesia are quite notable for their corrupt law systems. Even though protections exist, are they actually effective? Look into this and see if its worth adding a sentence about the ongoing struggle of conservation practices in many parts of Asia.
 * 5) * I only noticed a few wording choices that were a bit odd but nothing that is distracting or unclear.
 * 6) * I noticed that your final section seems a bit more like a scientific paper conclusion. Consider wording it more objectively rather than something than suggestive. I'm unsure if this comes down to my preference or what is beneficial to the article, so take this bullet with a grain of salt! :)
 * 7) Anything applicable to my own article?
 * 8) * I liked your strategy of bolding the work that you did when editing an existing section in the sandbox. I think that will be useful for me as well!
 * 9) * Overall, great job, seems like you just need to do your final clean up! :)