User:Robina jane/Littoraria pintado/Redgreenblue1 Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Robina Jane


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:Robina jane/Littoraria pintadoLink to the current version of the article

Evaluate the drafted changes
Please answer the following questions in detail addressed to the classmate whose article you are reviewing. Remember this is constructive feedback, so be polite and clear in your suggestions for improving their article. We are all working together to improve the Wikipedia pages for the amazing species.

Use a different font style (bold or italic) for your answers so it is easy for the author to see your comments!


 * 1) First, what does the article do well? (Think about content, structure, complementing the existing article, writing, etc.)
 * 2) * Is there anything from your review that impressed you? The article is well written, direct and straight to the point. It leaves no room for speculation and the article is unbiased. I would say the one thing about the article that impressed me is the detailed description thats put together.
 * 3) * Thank you for your comment, I appreciate that.
 * 4) Check the main points of the article:
 * 5) * Does the article only discuss the species the article is about? (and not the genus or family)
 * 6) * Yes, the article is solely based on the Littoraria Pintado.
 * 7) * Are the subtitles for the different sections appropriate?
 * 8) * The subtitles for each section is appropriate.
 * 9) * Is the information under each section appropriate or should anything be moved?
 * 10) * The information under each section is appropriate.
 * 11) * Is the writing style and language of the article appropriate? (concise and objective information for a worldwide audience)
 * 12) * As I stated before, this article is unbiased and well written.
 * 13) Check the sources:
 * 14) * Is each statement or sentence in the text linked to at least one source in the reference list with a little number?
 * 15) * Each section is linked with the appropriate and correct source
 * 16) * Is there a reference list at the bottom?
 * 17) * There is a reference list at the bottom.
 * 18) * Is each of those sources linked with a little number?
 * 19) * Each source is linked with a number.
 * 20) * What is the quality of the sources?
 * 21) * The sources are scholarly and unbiased.
 * 22) Give some suggestions on how to improve the article (think of anything that could be explained in more details or with more clarity or any issues addressed in the questions above):
 * 23) * What changes do you suggest and how would they improve the article?
 * 24) * I feel that this article is a good one. Something that may give the article some improvement would be more sources.
 * 25) * Is the article ready for prime-time and the world to see on Wikipedia? If not, how could the author improve the article to be ready?
 * 26) * I feel that this article is ready.
 * 27) What's the most important thing the author could do to improve the article? The most important thing that the article needs in order for it to improve would be some more pictures.                                                                                                                                -Thank you, will try to do that.
 * 28) Did you notice anything about the article you reviewed that could be applicable to your own article? Yes, that I need to put numbers on my sources.