User talk:Ddseibel/sandbox

Wow you have certainly put some time and effort into this, I honestly don't feel like I could tell you much more then what you already have down, but if I could I might add a generalized range of where the species is located and perhaps a map as well of their ranged habitat, and if one is not available but your feeling ambitious, maybe make one, but aside from that nice going, it looks like a good article! Not much I can add. Colder68 (talk) 20:26, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

I agree with Colder68, wow! This is honestly shaping up to be a nice page. I noticed that you started to add in a Ecological Importance, which I am sure will be great. This looks like a great article and will help people out if they need to know about white marlin. Great job! Amandaburl28 (talk) 20:35, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

Looks like a great start, I just noticed there are a couple minor issues like a couple places where you forgot to italicize scientific names. Zoezentner (talk) 18:07, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

Overall, you definitely did a good job of expounding upon the original article. First, I would suggest linking to other Wikipedia pages, especially since you refer to many other species of fish. For instance, link to the roundscale spearfish in the identification section.

Your sentences tend to be on the long side. It would be helpful for readers to either add some commas and other punctuation for smoother flow, or try to make your sentences more succinct. For example, in the “appearance and anatomy” section, I would maybe rewrite your sentence on sexual dimorphism as: “Even though male and female K. albidus display similar color patterns, white marlin are still sexually dimorphic, with females usually larger than males.” Once again, very nice article! My only qualms are grammatical in nature. The information is sound. Sespry13 (talk) 17:47, 28 March 2016 (UTC)