User:Mseelam/Hippodamia convergens/ItsChowChow Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Mseelam


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Mseelam/Hippodamia_convergens?veaction=edit&preload=Template%3ADashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template


 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Hippodamia convergens

Lead
The lead has been updated to reflect the changes in the distribution of the species. The lead includes an introductory sentence that concisely describes the topic. However, the lead does not have all the information present in the article, such as the biology of the species.

Content
The added contents are relevant to the topic. The added content to the appearance, distribution, and seasonal biology of the species improves the article. However, I am not sure if the content added is up-to-date as the sources used are unclear. I would add information and female and male biology if possible.

Tone and Balance
The article reads in a neutral tone and is unbiased.

Sources and Reference
Sources are where most of the errors were. There are no links to the sources provided and I tried to look up one source but failed to do so. There are no in-text citations to support the content. The sources are relevantly recent but I don't know if they are proper sources as no links are provided. I think peer-reviewed sources would be better sources to add to the article.

Images and Media
There were no new images added.

Organization
The added contents are well written and easy to read. However, some grammatical errors should be looked at such as "throughout" instead of "through out" and "range" instead of "ranges". The content is well broken down into relevant sections.

Overall Impressions
The added contents on biology, distribution, and appearance of the species improved the article. However, the content needs to be backed up by proper sources and in-text citations should be used.