User:Sophi.cheng/Snake/Aiden Brown Peer Review

General info
Sophi.cheng
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing:User:Sophi.cheng/Snake
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists):Snake

Evaluate the drafted changes
Your draft is looking good so far! Here's my suggestions/feedback, in no particular order:

- One way you could easily improve this article section in my opinion would be to add more WikiLinks to other Wikipedia pages, though this is a long article so there are likely links to most topics elsewhere, but just something you could consider.

- In general, I don't think you really need to change the lead, it's pretty solid as-is. It's got good information to introduce/summarize the topic, it is pretty detailed and a bit long but doesn't feel too much so to me. You probably don't need to summarize any of the information you added in the lead section unless you want to, considering the article's length.

- The whole article seems high-quality to me, so you probably don't need to worry much about changing major things like the organization or lead. Focusing on changing and adding to small sections like you've been doing seems like a good call.

- Information added is relevant to the topic and improves the article. I like how easy it is to understand even for those outside the field, without feeling overly simplified. It's clear and has good spelling and grammar.

- Your references/sources seem pretty good! References in the references section seem to just have a few small errors, as suggested by the red text. Links work for me. I don't know which are new sources or ones already used in the article, so just check when transferring to the page that there is no double-citing of sources.

- In the sentence, "The health of people is seriously threatened by snakebites, especially in areas where there is a great diversity of snakes and little access to medical care," I'd maybe consider adding a few examples of places with diverse snakes and little medical care access. It's not vital to understanding the information, but it might be a good small improvement.

- The sentence "Snakebite is classified by the World Health Organization (WHO) as "other neglected conditions," emphasizing the significance of this ailment on public health worldwide," might benefit from a bit of rewording. Some language, mainly "emphasizing the significance of," sounds more like it'd more be used for a persuasive piece of writing, when Wikipedia content should have an unbiased/neutral tone. Maybe consider just leaving it as "Snakebite is classified by the World Health Organization (WHO) as "other neglected conditions," though this is only a minor adjustment.

- Very small edit, but I think a comma should be added after "however" in this sentence: "However using snake goods creates moral questions..."

- The 5th reference could maybe be improved by linking to individual article(s) instead of just the search results for the term, to make it easier to find the information from the source.

- Overall, great job! You've got a solid draft going here, keep up the good work! :)