User:Ureegedeg/Hydrocharis morsus-ranae/Jiggyscience Peer Review

General info
(Ureegedeg)
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing:User:Ureegedeg/Hydrocharis morsus-ranae
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists):Hydrocharis morsus-ranae

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.)

The lead of the article looks good, it reflects on the body of information nicely. One addition that might be nice would be explaining the difference between European and American frog-bit. It would be nice if someone was attempting to use this article to identify a plant.

The description: the information in the description is good, the tone is good and the facts are stated. one addition that would be more user friendly to the average reader would be converting meters and centimeters into feet and inches, just so some people could have an actual understanding of the size of the plants. It might also be nice for some words to be either linked to a dictionary or add a definition section to explain some of the bigger words such as "aerenchyma". So, that all of the information needed to understand the plant is all on the same page.

I like the way the sections are organized and I believe the article will have a good flow. And from what I have read I did not see any grammatical errors that stood out.

Eventually it might be nice to add more images of the plant from different angles so that you could get a better understanding of the real plant.

Another thing that might help is if you transferred the references over to the sandbox, that way all the sources the information is extracted from is easily available to find. Also, when adding sources, it would be helpful if the "cite" button is used, that way the source is linked to the in-text citation. If transferred add a link in the citation so it leads to the original source, in the bibliography section there are no links to the articles. It would make finding the source used much easier.

Overall: I believe the addition of this information has already greatly improved the current article, I believe the sections that will be added are great, and can't wait to see the finished product.

Summary of suggested additions:


 * Differentiate between American and European frog-bit.
 * Convert measurements from metric to imperial (Help some better understand).
 * For large scientific words either link to a dictionary definition, or add a definition section to the article.
 * Possibly add better images of the plant.
 * Use the "cite" button and transfer the sources to the sandbox so the format is correct when transferred to the live wiki page.
 * Continue the great work :)