User:Ogs004/Flores scops owl/Ghm007 Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Ogs004


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * Flores scops owl


 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Flores scops owl

Evaluate the drafted changes
Lead:

This article does not have a lot of information, which hopefully means that there is plenty to add on/improve upon. There are about 5 sentences total, which describe where the species lives and what it looks like phenotypically.

Content:

This content is somewhat up to date but may need some updating if possible as the only source cited is from 2013. The content is relevant to the topic. I wouldn't say that any content doesn't belong, but there is certainly room to add more information if it is available. This article is categorized as a stub article and of low importance.

Tone and Balance:

The content does seem to be neutral. I am not sure if this is very relevant, but the use of the word "smallish" may be a bit informal, so changing it to something a little bit more formal may be helpful to credibility. Other than that, the information seems to be largely factual and unbiased.

Sources and References:

This article only has one source from 2013. I am a little bit confused on the way it is set up as the source is listed and there are two additional links underneath, but these may just be supporting articles. Based on the sources provided, most of the information from these sources is reflected in the Wikipedia article. I am not sure if the Bird Fact Sheet source is relevant as I did not see any information on this specific species, but I may have been missing something.

Organization:

The content is very easy to understand and concise and I did not notice any grammatical errors other than the informal language I pointed out earlier. If the author can find more information on this species, they should try to split the article into more organized categories. As of right now, all of the information is gathered at the top of the article, but there is also not a lot of information, so this is not an organizational problem at this time.

Images and Media:

There is one image, but I am not sure which source this image came from. However, I think that this image was a good contribution to the article and it is captioned with the name of the species. I think that the layout of the image is visually appealing as it is above the information about the taxonomic classification and status as an endangered species.

Overall impressions:

I am not sure which information has been added or what was originally there, but there is definitely room to add information and then further organize the information into different categories.