User:Snowr23/Yellow baboon/Hpayne4 Peer Review

Wikipedia Peer review BIOL 4155

Your name: Hollie Payne

Article you are reviewing: Yellow Baboon

1. First, what does the article do well? Is there anything from your review that impressed you? Any turn of phrase that describes the subject in a clear way?

The article describes the species and facts about it very well. How detailed it was impressed me.

2. What changes would you suggest the author apply to the article? Why would those changes be an improvement?

I would suggest breaking the article up. It does not have clear sections for the different topics in the article and if it did, it would be easier and more clear to read.

3. What's the most important thing the author could do to improve the article?

I think breaking the article up as well as providing more in depth information would help to improve this article.

4. Did you notice anything about the article you reviewed that could be applicable to your own article? If so, what?

No, this is a warm blooded land animal and mine is a cold blooded aquatic animal, so they do not have much in common.

5. Are the sections organized well, in a sensible order? Would they make more sense presented some other way (chronologically, for example)? Specifically, does the information they are adding to the article make sense where they are putting it?

The article needs to be broken into more clear sections, but the information being added by the student does make sense and adds to the article. Where they are putting it also makes sense.

6. Is each section's length equal to its importance to the article's subject? Are there sections in the article that seem unnecessary? Is anything off-topic?

There are no distinct sections, which I think needs to be addressed. It does flow in a good order but without clear sections. Nothing it off topic, it could just be organized a little better.

7. Does the article draw conclusions or try to convince the reader to accept one particular point of view?

No, the article is neutral and does not try to persuade in any way or draw conclusions.

8. Are there any words or phrases that don't feel neutral? For example, "the best idea," "most people," or negative associations, such as "While it's obvious that x, some insist that y."

No, all phrases seem to be neutral in the article.

9. Are most statements in the article connected to a reliable source, such as textbooks and journal articles? Or do they rely on blogs or self-published authors?

Yes, The sources are academic articles which are reliable sources. There could be more though because there are only two in the article so far.

10. Are there a lot of statements attributed to one or two sources? If so, it may lead to an unbalanced article, or one that leans too heavily into a single point of view.

There are only two articles, but the student is adding two more so I believe it is slightly unbalanced now, but when the student added their paragraph and sources the article will be more balanced.

11. Are there any unsourced statements in the article, or statements that you can't find stated in the references? Just because there is a source listed, doesn't mean it's presented accurately!

No, all statements seemed to be sources if needed, and sourced accurately to my knowledge.

General info
(provide username)
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


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

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.)