User:REL9040/Aspergillus niger/Solis.eve Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

REL9040


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:REL9040/Aspergillus_niger?veaction=edit&preload=Template%3ADashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template


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

Evaluate the drafted changes
(Compose a detailed peer review here, considering each of the key aspects listed above if it is relevant. Consider the guiding questions, and check out the examples of what feedback looks like.)

Lead

The lead for this article, so far, seems to be appropriate for the amount of content that is provided. I believe it gives enough information, without being too much. However, I would suggest adding a few more details from each section so far. It is concise, but would benefit from a few details from other sections.

Content

The content added to the article does seem to be relevant. However, I do think that they should focus more on other aspects of the microbe, instead of its uses and effects on health. I would like to see more abut the structure of the microbe, more details about its genomic sequence. Right now, it feels as if the content focuses more on the effects of the fungus, versus what it actually is.

Tone and Balance

The tone of the article is neutral, and there is no bias towards one thing or another.

Sources and References

All the sources seem to come from good journals. However, I believe that there is definite room for finding more recent references. A lot of the references on the article seem to be about 10 years old, or older. Finding more recent sources would improve the accuracy and keep the article up to date.

Organization

Overall, the organization of the article looks good, However, I think that the biggest way in which this article could improve, would be by linking certain topics under the same section, with subsections in that section. For example, I think that having the taxonomy and the genetics part of the fungus being under the same section would improve the flow of the article. The sections of "industrial use" and "pathogenicity" could be moved further down, and after the details of the fungus itself have been described.

Images and Media

The images added to the article are good, but they are lacking a bit caption wise, and citation wise.

Overall Impressions

This article does seem to be improved. Overall, the images helped, and the information added is good. The main thing, would be to fix the organization of the sections, and to possibly go into more detail about the fungus itself, if possible.