User:Nariyah B./Isognomon perna/Robina jane Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?
 * Nariyah B.


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Nariyah%20B./Isognomon_perna?veaction=edit&preload=Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template
 * Link to the current version of the article
 * Link to the current version of the article

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!


 * 1) First, what does the article do well? (Think about content, structure, complementing the existing article, writing, etc.)
 * 2) * Is there anything from your review that impressed you? -It impressed me that this specie is found in a lot of places.
 * 3) * I think it is interesting that my species is found in common areas.
 * 4) Check the main points of the article:
 * 5) * Does the article only discuss the species the article is about? (and not the genus or family) -Yes it only discuss the species in the article
 * 6) * I agree that my article only discusses the species.
 * 7) * Are the subtitles for the different sections appropriate?-Yes, subtitles are appropriate
 * 8) * I agree that all of my subtitles are appropriate.
 * 9) * Is the information under each section appropriate or should anything be moved?-Everything is good and appropriate.
 * 10) * I agree that my article is good and appropriate.
 * 11) * Is the writing style and language of the article appropriate? (concise and objective information for a worldwide audience) -Yes, the writing style is fine it just need a little bit of edit.
 * 12) * Thank you for your opinion and suggestions. I will take that into consideration.
 * 13) Check the sources:
 * 14) * Is each statement or sentence in the text linked to at least one source in the reference list with a little number? -Yes, at least one source have little number as a reference
 * 15) * I agree that I have at least one source with a little number as a reference.
 * 16) * Is there a reference list at the bottom? -YEs
 * 17) * Yes, I agree that I have a reference page at the bottom of my article.
 * 18) * Is each of those sources linked with a little number? -YEs
 * 19) * Yes, each of my sources have links that are provided with a little number.
 * 20) * What is the quality of the sources?- It is pretty much came from a good quality articles.
 * 21) * Thank you and I also agree.
 * 22) 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):
 * 23) * What changes do you suggest and how would they improve the article?-Just a little bit edit on the font, maybe make it a little bigger and the important words to be bold.
 * 24) * Thank you and I will take your feedback into consideration.
 * 25) * 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?-It is pretty much ready
 * 26) * I agree that my article is ready.
 * 27) What's the most important thing the author could do to improve the article?-Add a little bit more info if can
 * 28) Yes, I think it is always good to try and improve the article by adding more information if you can.
 * 29) Did you notice anything about the article you reviewed that could be applicable to your own article?-No
 * 30) I think everyone articles is different with their species, so everyone will have different information, writing style, and etc.