User:RuthSimmons/Euplokamis/Lettuce124 Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

RuthSimmons


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


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

Lead
Your first sentence works as a good summary of the article.

"These organisms have been found in fossil records from the Cambrian period, part of the Paleozoic Era, known for significant evolution occurring during this time, and it is even estimated that some has evolved prior to this period."


 * For this sentence, I think you could move it to a different section other than the lead. But if you would like to keep it where it is, you could remove 'even' to give it a more neutral feel. Also, what do you mean by significant evolution? Will you talk more about the evolution of Euplokamis in the fossil record? If not, I would suggest removing that phrase.

All together, you have a good lead section. I would just see if you could condense it down some. For example, a lot of the finer details of the taxonomic history of ctenophores [regarding the body structure] could be its own section. However, I would keep in the fact that there is minimal research done.

Content
The content you have so far is very informative. You did a good job with your research.


 * In the feeding behavior section, I would add what Euplokamis feeds on if that information is available

"Ctenophores are divided into two classes based on either the presence (Tentaculata or the lack (Nuda) of tentacles. Within each class, there are multiple orders to further distinguish their structures and characteristics. The class Tentaculata contains the following orders: Cydippida, Lobata, and Cestida"


 * I feel like this sentenced could be removed because the next sentence "The genus Euplokamis sp..." summarizes that information perfectly.

In the bioluminescence section, maybe you could add more information on predator-prey relationships or the impact that this genus has in its ecosystem (if that info is available). That could be a new ecology section.

Tone & Balance
I think you did a good job with tone and balance overall, but there are a few places that it could be improved.

"Based on this research of Euplokamis, it is likely that bioluminescence in these organisms may function as a defense mechanism"


 * Maybe you could word this sentence like this, so it sounds less like it is your own opinion:  'Research suggests that bioluminescence in Euplokamis sp. may function as a defense mechanism.'

Organization
Your article is organized well. I think some areas could be more concise, as I have previously mentioned, but other than that, good job. Everything flows nicely.

Images & Media
The images are great. Being able to see what Euplokamis looks like does aid in understanding. Especially for the anatomy and bioluminescence sections.

Overall
You have a strong article with a good amount of relevant information. You've done a great job explaining why the features this genus has is important and what their functions are.