User:Reesegroover/Campylobacter jejuni/Camccorkle Peer Review

General info
User:Reesegroover
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:Reesegroover/Campylobacter jejuni:
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Campylobacter jejuni

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.)

The disease section is well-written and concise, but I noticed you removed one of the citations from the original disease section. You may want to evaluate finding a citation to replace the one you removed.

I think the pathogenesis section could be a little more clear. Some of the sentences here get long and wordy and may be difficult to understand to the reader. (I know you're still working on it, though) The entire section on the published article follows a very thorough, yet concise path of information. Maybe consider modeling your edits to that structure.

Some of the sentences in the transmission section could be simplified and/or separated. It seems like there are a few run-on sentences, and it may be easier to understand if you broke some of the sentences down.

The metabolism section is great. It is concise and thorough, supplying enough information for the reader to understand but not overwhelming them. There is also a thorough amount of citations to back up your claims.

Reference 1 and 2 are repeated in your references section.