User:Orosas/Ardi/Cornyon Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Orosas


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Orosas/Ardi?veaction=edit&preload=Template%3ADashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template


 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Ardi

Evaluate the drafted changes
In evaluating the user's Sandbox draft of their additions to the Ardi article, it is clear to me that their additions will contribute significantly to the whole article as a whole, which despite its "Description" section, lacks information on the pelvis. Diving into the user's sources, it is clear that the sources come from reliably peer reviewed journals and publishers, and they are all very recent, with the oldest articles being from 2009.

An important point to address in terms of tone: be care with tone. It is clear that the user is not attempting to persuade readers and their evidence reflects significant research. However, some of the wording in the draft follows a narrative structure that sounds like a student's persuasive essay, such as the hook in the first sentence in "Pelvis" mentioning that "Ardi's pelvis told a different story", and the conclusion sentence in "Foot" mentioning how Ardi's remains "captures a moment in time".

I believe that the draft would benefit from a brief explanation for what exactly a "toe off" action is, to enhance understanding.

Additionally, there were a few instances in which binominal nomenclature was not properly formatted (see edit history). Overall, the grammar and spelling is proper and clear. Perhaps a few more read throughs would be beneficial to edit phrasing to be more concise, although this is not necessary.

Overall an excellent addition to the main article that would benefit from few edits.