User talk:Enabulei/Firefly squid/Realefu Peer Review

The edits were confusing to navigate and difficult to determine where the information you found would be added to the original article. The edits should be integrated or meshed into the paragraphs of the actual article rather than having the two separate and then bolded to indicate what was changed/ added. It was difficult to pick out what parts of the article were added versus what was originally there. The research and implications in the Mating section were interesting to read but contain too much information for the original article; make this part more concise. Only some parts of the research and background should be added, such as the findings and conclusion of the research. The tone of the edits is neutral and well-balanced. The edits are grammatically correct. The level of scientific language is fine, just make sure you don't use too much jargon when talking about the research.