User:Mlum6/Sargassum aquifolium/Goby26 Peer Review

General info


 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Mlum6


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Mlum6/Sargassum_aquifolium?veaction=edit&preload=Template%3ADashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)



Evaluate the drafted changes
Please answer the following questions in detail addressed to the classmate whose article you are reviewing. Remember this is constructive feedback, so be polite and clear in your suggestions for improving their article. We are all working together to improve the Wikipedia pages for the amazing species.

Use a different font style (bold or italic) for your answers so it is easy for the author to see your comments!


 * First, what does the article do well? (Think about content, structure, complementing the existing article, writing, etc.)
 * The article was able to clearly present what sargassum aquifolium is, its characteristics and why it is important.
 * Check the main points of the article:
 * Does the article only discuss the species the article is about? (and not the genus or family)
 * Yes
 * Are the subtitles for the different sections appropriate?
 * Yes
 * Is the information under each section appropriate or should anything be moved?
 * I think the content under each section is appropriate.
 * Is the writing style and language of the article appropriate? (concise and objective information for a worldwide audience)
 * Yes, although there are a couple grammatical issues.
 * Check the sources:
 * Is each statement or sentence in the text linked to at least one source in the reference list with a little number?
 * Not every single sentence, but the most important ones are.
 * Is there a reference list at the bottom?
 * Yes
 * Is each of those sources linked with a little number?
 * Yes
 * What is the quality of the sources?
 * The sources are of adequate quality.
 * Give some suggestions on how to improve the article (think of anything that could be explained in more details or with more clarity or any issues addressed in the questions above):
 * What changes do you suggest and how would they improve the article?
 * I think the article could improve with a little more general information and some grammatical corrections.
 * Is the article ready for prime-time and the world to see on Wikipedia? If not, how could the author improve the article to be ready?
 * I think it would be fine to publish it as is, but it could be polished a little.
 * Did you notice anything about the article you reviewed that could be applicable to your own article?
 * Yes. I could definitely benefit from polishing my article with more information and reviewing my grammar.