User:Ztanaka/Achatinella fuscobasis/Bencie Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Ztanaka


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * Achatinella fuscobasis

Achatinella fuscobasis
 * Link to the current version of the article

Evaluate the drafted changes
Please answer the following questions in detail addressed to the classmate whose article you are reviewing. Remember this is constructive feedback, so be polite and clear in your suggestions for improving their article. We are all working together to improve the Wikipedia pages for the amazing species.

Use a different font style (bold or italic) for your answers so it is easy for the author to see your comments!


 * 1) First, what does the article do well? (Think about content, structure, complementing the existing article, writing, etc.) the author did well putting a lot of information about the species
 * 2) * Is there anything from your review that impressed you? The article looks very organized
 * 3) Check the main points of the article:
 * 4) * Does the article only discuss the species the article is about? (and not the genus or family) yes, the article only discusses the species
 * 5) * Are the subtitles for the different sections appropriate? Yes, it helped me easily to clarify each section
 * 6) * Is the information under each section appropriate or should anything be moved? everything is good
 * 7) * Is the writing style and language of the article appropriate? (concise and objective information for a worldwide audience) Yes, the article is appropriate. It has a lot of information that will help the audience learn about the species
 * 8) Check the sources:
 * 9) * Is each statement or sentence in the text linked to at least one source in the reference list with a little number? Yes, it has little numbers that will let you go through the site that is on the bottom
 * 10) * Is there a reference list at the bottom? yes
 * 11) * Is each of those sources linked with a little number? yes, they are linked
 * 12) * What is the quality of the sources? The quality of the article is good
 * 13) Give some suggestions on how to improve the article (think of anything that could be explained in more details or with more clarity or any issues addressed in the questions above):
 * 14) * What changes do you suggest and how would they improve the article? nothing, everything is good. there is a lot of information that I learned.
 * 15) * Is the article ready for prime-time and the world to see on Wikipedia? If not, how could the author improve the article to be ready? yes
 * 16) What's the most important thing the author could do to improve the article? The article is good
 * 17) Did you notice anything about the article you reviewed that could be applicable to your own article? Mines doesn't have little numbers on it so I think, I need to edit mines

= Zoey: Peer review doesn't give any advice to improve so that shows me that there are no huge flaws I have to worry about. =