User:Planariaworm/Cat predation on wildlife/Ablip Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Planariaworm, Nprocaccini, Jeanius1


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:Planariaworm/Cat predation on wildlife
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Cat predation on wildlife

Evaluate the drafted changes
Lead

- Per the groups sandbox, the lead does look like there is additional information pertaining to the topics they would like to cover. The original lead of the article covers some of the topics they intend on elaborating on and their additions discuss new topics being covered such as disease carriers. The lead is brief and to the point which serves its purpose.

Content

- The content discussed in the sandbox is topical and refreshing to the original article. I enjoyed the discussion of feral cat population management and TNR as in NYC this is a major issue. While the content in the sandbox does not explicitly state dates, the sources are all from recent years indicating that the content is up to date.

Tone and Balance

- The content is neutral and does not seem persuasive. Sources and References

- The content does back up what the sources say. The sources are current like I had mentioned, they have been published within the past 10 years perhaps because this has become more of an issue. One of the sources they used was from Cornell University College of Veterinary Medicine which I felt was a perfect fit for this topic. I was able to open some of the links, I am not sure if maybe my browser is the issue. Organization

- The content is well written and well organized. I do not see many grammatical errors but would advise they reread their work before publishing to make sure that terms are in the correct tense. I would also recommend changing some of the punctuation used to make some sentences flow a bit better when reading. Images and Media

- I do think the original article could use some more images, particularly in the "Impact by Location" section. Perhaps the group could add some interesting and relevant images to this section as they continue editing the article. Overall Impressions

- Overall I think the group is doing a really good job at adding relevant information to the existing article. It seems that the group has made a good amount of progress on their edits so I would encourage them to continue doing as they have been. I would suggest rereading the article and adjusting some word and punctuation choices to make their points flow a bit more. Otherwise, keep up the good work!