User:NoahKealii/Achatinella fulgens/MGlass75 Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

(provide username) NoahKealii


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * Editing User:NoahKealii/Achatinella fulgens - Wikipedia


 * 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!

'''The author does well at structuralizing the sentences to make sure it stays as a passive voice and keeps it as present tense. I do like how the sources are formatted like how it is. It is also straight to the point.'''
 * 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?

Thank you for recognizing this, I tried my best to do so. '''The article only discusses about the species specifically and the subtitles for the different sections are appropriate. Information under each section correspond to their section, so no error in that. The writing style and language is appropriate.'''
 * 1) Check the main points of the article:
 * 2) * Does the article only discuss the species the article is about? (and not the genus or family)
 * 3) * Are the subtitles for the different sections appropriate?
 * 4) * Is the information under each section appropriate or should anything be moved?
 * 5) * Is the writing style and language of the article appropriate? (concise and objective information for a worldwide audience)

Thank you for your feedback. '''Each sentence has a source connected to it that connects to a source at the reference list with the small numbers. The quality of the sources is good for the topic.'''
 * 1) Check the sources:
 * 2) * Is each statement or sentence in the text linked to at least one source in the reference list with a little number?
 * 3) * Is there a reference list at the bottom?
 * 4) * Is each of those sources linked with a little number?
 * 5) * What is the quality of the sources?

I tried my best to make sure that my sources were reliable and accurate, and I made sure to cite every statement and link it to a source. A suggestion for a change is to have the species scientific name be italicized every time it is mentioned to get it ready for its prime-time, but overall, it is a great for the world to see.
 * 1) 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):
 * 2) * What changes do you suggest and how would they improve the article?
 * 3) * 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?

Thank you for pointing this out, I didn't realize that this was something that other Wikipedia editors did when writing about species so I will make sure to italicize the scientific name of the specific species in my final article. The author could capitalize the headings to make more appealing.
 * What's the most important thing the author could do to improve the article?

Thank you for the feedback, but judging by other Wikipedia articles it seems as if only the first letter of every section is capitalized unless there are proper nouns present, so I don't think I will make this change. I noticed some errors in my own article after reviewing this one and I would like to have my sources be neatly formatted like that and having each sentence have a source connected to them.
 * Did you notice anything about the article you reviewed that could be applicable to your own article?

I'm sure your article will be amazing, thank you for taking the time to peer review my article.