User:Piilaniii/Cellana talcosa/Amenelogoleo Peer Review

General info
Piilaniii Cellana talcosa
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing:Cellana talcosa
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists):Cellana Talcosa

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 species native to Hawaii and for the World to meet.

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.) The article excels in focusing solely on the species Cellana Talcosa without staring into discussion about broader categories such as genus or family. The structure seems well organized with appropriate subtitles for different sections.
 * 2) * Is there anything from your review that impressed you? I was particularly impressed by the articles ability to maintain a tight focus on the species Cellana Talcosa and its cultural significance without deviating into discussions about related genera or families.
 * 3) Check the main points of the article:
 * 4) * Does the article only discuss the species the article is about? (and not the genus or family) Based on the information provided, it seems that the articles effectively discusses only the species Cellana Talcosa and avoids delving into discussions about the genus or family. The use of subtitles for different sections appears to be appropriate, aiding in the organization of the content.
 * 5) * Are the subtitles for the different sections appropriate?
 * 6) * Yes, based on the information provided, it seems that the subtitles for the different sections in the article are appropriate.
 * 7) * Is the information under each section appropriate or should anything be moved?
 * 8) * Based on the information or details provided, it appears that the information under each section of the article is appropriate and relevant to the specific aspects of Cellana Talcosa being discussed. However, there are any sections where certain information could be better places or if there are details that could enhance the overall flow of the article, it might be beneficial to consider moving them for better coherence and clarity.
 * 9) * Is the writing style and language of the article appropriate? (concise and objective information for a worldwide audience)
 * 10) * The writing style and language used in the article are appropriate for providing concise and objective information suitable for a worldwide audience.
 * 11) Check the sources:
 * 12) * Is each statement or sentence in the text linked to at least one source in the reference list with a little number?
 * 13) * I cannot determine whether each statement or sentence in the text is linked to a source in the reference list.
 * 14) * Is there a reference list at the bottom?
 * 15) * Yes
 * 16) * Is each of those sources linked with a little number?
 * 17) * No
 * 18) * What is the quality of the sources?
 * 19) * A sources its good and it gather a lot of information about the articles.
 * 20) 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):
 * 21) * What changes do you suggest and how would they improve the article?
 * 22) * No changes, everything is clear but need more references to elaborate more about the article.
 * 23) * 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?
 * 24) * No, provide more references and need more information about the article
 * 25) What's the most important thing the author could do to improve the article? Provide or research more information about the articles and provide reference.
 * 26) Did you notice anything about the article you reviewed that could be applicable to your own article?  I notice that it is the same with me, I need more reference to improve my article