User:Shurwill/Parupeneus porphyreus/Esjohnso2022 Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Shurwill


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


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

Peer Review
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.


 * 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 addition of the extra information from the initial one liner in the published article.  Thank you 
 * 3) Any turn of phrase that described the species in a clear way?  Everything in the article was clear but it was not broken up into subsections such as habitat, distribution, biology, etc.  Will do 
 * 4) Check the sources:  I could no as the user did not use the cite option on the wikipedia editing section.   References at the bottom of the page were not linked to the information in the sandbox draft.
 * 5)  Will do 
 * 6) Is each statement or sentence in the text linked to at least one source in the reference list with a little number? no  Will do 
 * 7) Does the article only discuss the species the article is about? yes
 * 8) Is there a reference list at the bottom? yes Is each of those sources linked with a little number? no  Will do 
 * 9) What is the quality of the sources? looked ok  Thank you 
 * 10) What changes would you suggest the author apply to the article?  link the references in the article to the information that corresponds to that reference using the cite option, then I would suggest breaking the article up into sub sections and maybe adding an illustration.  Will do 
 * 11) Why would those changes be an improvement? (Sources) they would make the article easier to be peer reviewed.  Thank you 
 * 12) 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? I think the references and adding an illustration to show people what the  looks like.   Will do 
 * 13) What's the most important thing the author could do to improve the article? add resources   Will do 
 * 14) Did you notice anything about the article you reviewed that could be applicable to your own article?  I think adding a better discription and maybe talking further about how the flightless crane developed to be flightless.  Interesting species a bird that doesn't fly