User talk:Aseb101/Algerian mouse

Outline Feedback
Great start! I can tell you have put a lot of thought into the ideas you will write about in your article because you identified the main result of all of your references. Organizing all of these ideas into a more detailed outline would allow me to provide more thorough feedback. The outline should indicate your plans for the main sections and subsections you would like to add, and a list of bullets or sentences that show all of the main ideas you will cover in each section.

It may help to reorganize some of the information in the outline you have planned. I think an improved outline would have sections: Mating System, Mate Attraction and Competition, and Parental Care. The mating system section would describe social monogamy and the environmental/social factors that lead to monogamy. The next section would describe the traits that individuals use to attract and compete for mates, like body size dimorphism, aggression, odor, and sperm production, along with the hormone/protein pathways you have researched for each trait. Then, your article may finish with the parental care section. If do not have a lot of information on parental care, it may work well to incorporate the parental care information into the mating system section and describe how patterns of parental care lead to social monogamy.

This is a great start! Happy to give more feedback if you wish to update the outline. Elioeilish (talk) 19:43, 28 February 2023 (UTC)

Peer Review: Globally I think you did some things very well. I think having Behavior and Ecology be separate from Reproduction is a good idea. I also think the divisions that the Reproduction section has make sense as well. I also believe the overall writing is very good. Some of the changes I believe could be made globally are the Behavior and Ecology section is a lot smaller than the Reproduction section so it might be good to increase its size, and the paternal care division is also small so I believe it could be removed or its information distributed to the other sections. Locally I believe there are some things done very well. I believe the titles of the divisions of the reproduction section are good. The citations seem to be placed well and there is a good amount. Finally, the mating system section has very good writing. Some of the local ways I believe it could be improved are the citations should be actually cited instead of having the number be put in parenthesis. Next some of the division titles are capitalized and some are not. I would choose to either capitalize them all or not. Finally in the mate attraction and competition section there is a place where you started a parenthesis but forgot to close it. Overall, I think the article is done well. - Ttbioclass. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ttbioclass (talk • contribs) 05:30, 17 March 2023 (UTC)


 * Response to the reviewer: Thank you for the review. I added more information in the behavior and ecology section as recommended. Paternal care has been moved to the end of the reproductive system. Also, the citation and the titles have been improved. Aseb101 (talk) 14:50, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

Peer Review 1
Great work on this! I think you did a great job of organizing your topics and providing clear headings for each subtopic. I also liked how most of the subtopics have about the same amount of information which helps balance out what you've written. For the paternal care section though, I feel like it may make more sense to put the information from Behavior and Ecology into that section and change the heading to parental care, since everything in that first section relates to parental care. Also, I think it might make sense to move the parental care section to the end of the Reproduction section, since mate attraction and competition, and spermatogenic activity are topics related to pre-copulation while parental care is a post-copulation behavior.

You did a really good job on sentence structure and flowing from topic to topic! You provide clear and concise explanations on the topics you covered. One thing I think might help this draft is adding a few more references. One specific area was the first couple sentences of the mate attraction and competition section. Also, the last sentence of the mating system section seemed just a bit unclear; I think it may help to explain why reproductive state of females might be important in other species and expanding a bit on "the issue of encounters by male mice."

Overall, really great job so far! Humblebear1 (talk) 02:21, 21 March 2023 (UTC)


 * Response to the reviewer: Thank you for the review. Paternal care has been moved to the end of the reproductive system. Though I appreciate the suggestion of adding references to mate attraction and competition, which I think was okay, instead I added more references in other sections. There is more information added in behavior and ecology section regarding male female behavior which I believe will help to explain the reproductive state of female.   Aseb101 (talk) 14:59, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

Peer Review 2
Global Comments: Overall, this seems like a very thorough article with in–depth information. In the "Behavior and ecology" section, it might be helpful to add information about their diet. Also, it would be helpful to add links to already existing wiki pages for topics such as ecto– and endoparasites or spermatogenesis. Local Comments: Each sentence is well–written and citations are added appropriately throughout. I would suggest trying to improve the flow of each paragraph as sometimes it seems the sentences are just added as a list rather than reading as being related to each other. I would replace "probably" with "likely" in the Spermatogenic activity section so it sounds more scholarly. I would replace "might" with "could" in "This perception of competitor's odors in mice might have important implications for mate choice and other social behaviors in this species".Layana234 (talk) 17:57, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

Response to the reviewer:Thank you for your review. Information about their diet was already present in the main article, so I did not add anything. The links have been added as per your suggestion. Some of the paragraphs are already in the main article and I only added the part I wrote for the review. Once I merge my writing with the main article, I think it will make more sense and the sentences will sound more relatable. I have replaced the words as per your suggestions. Aseb101 (talk) 18:24, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Peer Review 3
Global comments:

I really liked how you organized the info into many subsections and did not put too much info in one section. I also think the order of the subsections for the reproduction section is very good and i like how it follows the progression of mating.

1. I would suggest adding some links to other wikipedia pages for terms that the typical reader may be unfamiliar with (i.e sympatric, sexual dimorphism). 2. Generally, for the sentences with 3+ commas that aren’t just lists, I would recommend breaking up the sentences into two. 4. Possibly use subsections in the behavior and ecology section. It seems like there is a lot of information on many topics included under this header that could be organized into subsections like the reproduction section.

Local Comments:

I really liked how thorough each paragraph was and how each sentence was readily understandable. The level of detail prevented me from ever being confused by general or ambiguous statements. This level of detail is very helpful for first time readers.

1. I would split this sentence into two: “Daily displacements vary depending on the habitat, sex, age, and season, and the average ranged from 27.8 m to 112.0 m”. 2. For this sentence: “During the regeneration process following fires in the Mediterranean ecosystem, it is a very frequent species in exposed zones, irregular in scrubland, and very scarce in mature forests” i would rephrase it as “during the regeneration process following fires in the Mediterranean ecosystem, this species is found frequently in exposed areas, less frequently in scrubland, and rarely in mature forests” or something along those lines. 3. For this sentence I am a little confused: “ Specifically, male mice that had social interactions with an unfamiliar male showed reduced attraction to the odor of the competitor compared to mice that had no social interaction.” Does this mean that male mice have less attraction to a female mouse when she has the odor of a competitor on her? I would perhaps re-write to make explicit that they have less attraction to a female with the scent. Scoobydoo567 (talk) 00:31, 13 April 2023 (UTC)


 * Response to the reviewer: Thank you for your review. The links have been added as per your suggestion. Some of the paragraphs are already in the main article and I only added the part I wrote for the review. Once I merge my writing with the main article, I think it will make more sense and the sentences will sound more relatable. I have replaced the words as per your suggestions. For global comment 2, 4 and local comment 2, I realized most of the information was repetition of the main article. So, I deleted those portions. Now it should be okay without subheadings. I have rephrased the sentences as per your suggestion.  For local comment 3, I rewrote the sentences to make it clearer.  Aseb101 (talk) 20:50, 16 April 2023 (UTC)