User:Nguyensoren/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Adamsia palliata

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
Most sources are quite old and there are broken citations. The sections are under-developed.

Evaluate the article
Content: Everything is relevant, but the sections are under-developed. For example, the carcinoecia can be better described. There is more information on the distribution and ecology of this species. It should be mentioned that the Adamsia and Calliactis genera are now considered synonymous, so this species is sometimes referred to as Calliactis palliata.

Tone: The article is neutral.

Sources: Two citations (4 and 5) which are hyperlinks are broken. Most information is from one source from 1860.

Talk page: There is nothing on the talk page.

The edit history seems to be mostly structural.