User:Purnimav/Carcharhinus tjutjot/Zabalene Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Purnimav & Snwilliams2022


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * Carcharhinus tjutjot


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

Evaluate the drafted changes
Lead

I think that this article has a very strong lead! Having a description, a general background, and an interesting fact about its relevance to global fisheries makes it a very good hook for the rest of the article. In my opinion, it is ideal for the draft that you have now. If the draft continues to be expanded upon, I would update the lead accordingly.

Content

In terms of content, I think that you have the general important items needed for a starter article. Taxonomy, description, and distribution are probably the first things that are expanded upon when thinking of a species. Given that this is a draft, I think that it would be best to add a few more sections to further expand our understanding of the shark. What is its diet? Is it a top predator in the area it lives in? What are the components of its migration? I think it would also be very interesting to add a section expanding on its spawning and nursing areas that overlap with commercial fishing grounds, as mentioned in the lead. Once these are added, I think it will be a very well rounded WIki article!

Tone and Balance

The draft so far is pretty to the point. There are a few sentences that are repetitive amongst paragraphs (such as the bit about its confusion with C. sealei), but other than that it is a pleasant read. I think maybe adding a few more descriptive notes (if possible, since I know sometimes there might not be enough literature to support) would be helpful in evening out the balance of the paper.

Sources and References

Your sources are great! I did realize that source 6 & 7 (Azri (2020)) are the same, so those can be merged. The link for source 4 also leads me to a "not found" page, so I would try and find the article again if possible. I think that you have a good balance of sources though.

Organization

The overall organization seems to be very up to Wikipedia's guidelines and standards, so I wouldn't change much besides adding a few more sections.

Images and Media

On my screen, I do not see any images, so I would try and locate some if possible. I think maybe incorporating an image in the Taxonomy section that shows the distinctive markings mentioned would be really cool.

Overall impressions

I think this is a fantastic draft! There is more than enough time to clean up everything you both have written and add a bit more if you can find additional sources. I cannot wait to read the finished article!