User:Phaygood/Pickhandle barracuda/Gedrickt Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Phaygood


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


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

Peer Review
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.


 * 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? I like how it started, but there's only one section there. Nice beginning adding on to the original article though, it has info that wasn't added before. Thank you I figured the original introduction served it's purpose.
 * 3) Any turn of phrase that described the species in a clear way? Habitat
 * 4) Check the sources:
 * 5) Is each statement or sentence in the text linked to at least one source in the reference list with a little number? No, the bibliography isn't complete either. I plan to fix that before the final product
 * 6) Does the article only discuss the species the article is about? Yes Fortunately.
 * 7) Is there a reference list at the bottom? Is each of those sources linked with a little number? No, and I don't really know which source is for what. I messed up the links in the google doc but will fix it.
 * 8) What is the quality of the sources? I see a lot of sources pulled from articles like mine, for example FishBase, the Australian Museum, and they look good. My only concern is the "Are mangroves a limiting resource for two coral reef fishes?" I don't know what that's about. Most of my sources contain limited information but all serve a purpose, I will double check the link.
 * 9) What changes would you suggest the author apply to the article? Include sources at the end of sentences that link to the reference section, add more sections like maybe anatomy and reproduction, and complete bibliography.
 * 10) Why would those changes be an improvement? It would fulfill the requirements to complete the wiki article True.
 * 11) 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? The author could improve with what I had listed in question 3 I agree, the references need work.
 * 12) What's the most important thing the author could do to improve the article? Annotate, complete the bibliography, and add those little numbers at the end of sentences to reference what Phaygood is talking about Valid advice, will take into consideration when working on final product
 * 13) Did you notice anything about the article you reviewed that could be applicable to your own article? I don't have stuff like eating habits down so maybe I will research a little bit more to find a source for that. It was a very unique thing to add.