User:Robertplyer/Pearl crescent/JuslynZC Peer Review

General info
Robertplyer
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * Pearl crescent
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Pearl crescent

Evaluate the drafted changes
Lead

The lead of the article contains a lot of general and helpful information about this species. It contains information on the general distribution and habitat characteristics of this species. It also provides a lot of useful information about the hostplants of this species. The lead is also very informational but concise.

Content

The content added is relevant to the topic and is up-to-date.

Tone and Balance

The content added is neutral and does not seem to be heavily biased towards one perspective over another. There are not really viewpoints that I felt were overrepresented or underrepresented.

Sources and References

Many of the sources and references come from peer-reviewed journal articles which describe information on hybridization studies done on this species. The sources that they included are reliable sources of information and come from peer-reviewed resources.

Organization

They added "Hybridization" and "Relation to other species" headings to this article. The content added is very well-organized and is broken down into sections which concisely tell the reader what the major points are.

Overall Impression

My overall impression is that their edits are very informative and add good information on the topic. They definitely provide a lot of information on hybridization for this species, and they do it in a concise and informative manner! The article's strengths include the general information they have about the species, including its appearance, general distribution, and hostplants. Additionally, the strengths include the well-written and concise information provided on hybridization experiments done with the Pearl Crescent butterfly.