User:Srthompson012/Roloway monkey/Audrakobus Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Srthompson012


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

Evaluate the drafted changes
The article has a lot of good information in it. It is pretty short so it is a good article to add information too. The taxonomy section is quite short and could benefit from more information being added there. If there is not a lot of other information to add into that section you could potentially add it into the ecology section or put it in the main description. The introductory paragraph is a good start to the article and does a good job of introducing the reader into the topic. All the information is well written and is well though out. The references look like they all come from good sources and there are seven references for such little information, which is also good because there is variation among where the information came from. The article seems a little unbalanced, due to the fact that conservation section is much greater than all the other sections. Hopefully once more information is provided into the other sections it will even out. Overall, the article looks really good and it flows nicely.