User:Susennac/Amphioctopus fangsiao/SydneyEGrace Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Susennac


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:Susennac/Amphioctopus fangsiao
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Amphioctopus fangsiao

Evaluate the drafted changes
Things done well:

- The information included is very interesting

- The Lead section feels like a good intro to the page as a whole, though some grammar edits may improve it.

- The imbedded links throughout the article are very helpful, and add good depth and background to the information overall.

- Overall tone was balanced, and an objective, scientific voice was implemented well.

- The article holds my interest

- Good range of sources

Areas for Improvement:

- Grammar could use some work to increase readability, some of the sentences were a bit difficult to follow

- The Lead section has good content, but could potentially be more concise (next bullet)

- Some sentences were repetitive. For example, in the Lead section, the two sentences about where the octopus can be found could be put into one sentence to make the flow better.

- Some information about the general behavior of the octopus could be valuable in understanding the organism.

- The section about culinary use is interesting, but feels a bit out of place among discussions of genetics and diseases of the organism.

- Some reorganizing may be useful - either placing it at the end, closer to the beginning, combining it with the distribution information as it ties into the locale of the octopus

- Although I was interested in everything included, the information discussed is quite heavily scientific. Adding some more general information that anyone interested in the organism could grasp may improve the accessibility of the article.