User:ShelbyGodby/Acinetobacter baylyi/Cfb49840 Peer Review

Lead
The lead currently looks like a fairly good overview of the sections in the article. I think it could be a little more specific with some of the information. I also think the lead paragraph should start with some of the main characteristics of the bacteria instead of the history of the bacteria. Usually when people open a wiki article, it is helpful to see what exactly the bacteria is rather than where it was found or who it was named after (although those are really interesting things to include later on).

The sentences in about where the bacteria is found and who it was named after do not appear anywhere else in the article, so maybe it would be beneficial to have a history section where you talk more about these things.

Content
I think the content is all very relevant. I don't know much about this topic, so I assume it is all up to date. I would like to know more about the treatment. Maybe you could explain generally how each treatment targets this bacteria. Likewise, I think more info could be added to the applications section.

I think there could be a section on morphology and physiology that would give more insight on this bacteria.

Tone and Balance
This article is neutral and balanced.

Sources and References
There are a large number of sources which is good! Everything seems to be referenced.

Organization
I really liked the organization of this paper and the order of the sections. I like that pathophysiology, treatment, and applications are at the end. I would definitely put some sections about morphology and physiology at the beginning.

General info
(ShelbyGodby)
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing:User:ShelbyGodby/Acinetobacter baylyi
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists):Acinetobacter baylyi

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.)