User:NoahKealii/Achatinella fulgens/Robina jane Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

NoahKealii


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:NoahKealii/Achatinella_fulgens?veaction=edit&preload=Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template


 * 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? -The Information he put in there are good and well written
 * 3) * Thank you for the feedback.
 * 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
 * 6) * Are the subtitles for the different sections appropriate?-Yes it is appropriate
 * 7) * Is the information under each section appropriate or should anything be moved?-Everything is fine
 * 8) * Is the writing style and language of the article appropriate? (concise and objective information for a worldwide audience)-Yes it is appropriate
 * 9) * Thank you for the feedback, I did my best to make sure the article was as neutral and accurate as possible while being brief and professional.
 * 10) Check the sources:
 * 11) * Is each statement or sentence in the text linked to at least one source in the reference list with a little number?-Yes, the text are linked with a little number.
 * 12) * Is there a reference list at the bottom?-Yes there is
 * 13) * Is each of those sources linked with a little number? -Yes it is
 * 14) * What is the quality of the sources?It is well written and the articles that is used are good sources
 * 15) * I made sure to choose the most reliable sources and to cite every factual statement that was made in my article, so I appreciate the recognition.
 * 16) 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):
 * 17) * What changes do you suggest and how would they improve the article?-Maybe more information if can
 * 18) * 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?-Yes, it is ready.
 * 19) * Thank you, I did make some minor changes but the article hasn't been changed heavily.
 * 20) What's the most important thing the author could do to improve the article?-Try to put more information if you can find more but if not, it should be okay. I did not add any new information but I did make some minor changes.
 * 21) Did you notice anything about the article you reviewed that could be applicable to your own article?-No That's completely valid and perfectly fine. I'm sure your article will be a good contribution to the Wikipedia space as is.