User talk:Jalashiareliford/sandbox

1. First, what does the article do well? Is there anything from your review that impressed you? Any turn of phrase that described the subject in a clear way?

-The article does a good job of giving interesting facts. Something that impressed me was how it tells the habitat, reproduction, and biology of the species.

2. What changes would you suggest the author apply to the article? Why would those changes be an improvement?

- I think the article is still new but could use a section describing its life cycle or diet to give the reader more information regarding the species. The article edit does a good job of explaining more information regarding the biology section.

3. What's the most important thing the author could do to improve the article?

- The author does a good job of giving more information regarding the biology information of the fish. A way the author could improve the article could be by using the citation for the second source separately from the first source.

4. Did you notice anything about the article you reviewed that could be applicable to your own article? If so, what?

- The author does a good job of introducing the source of where the information was gathered and I could use that type of introduction in my article as well as adding a hyperlink for example ammoniotelic. 5. Are the sections organized well, in a sensible order? Would they make more sense presented some other way (chronologically, for example)? Specifically, does the information they are adding to the article make sense where they are putting it?

- I believe the article is organized in a sensible order. The information where the author wants to add to the article makes sense.

6. Is each section's length equal to its importance to the article's subject? Are there sections in the article that seem unnecessary? Is anything off-topic?

-Some sections of the article seem very short and could use more information to explain sections for example how reproduction works. The section being added toward biology would help strengthen this page as it seems it's still very early in development.

7. Does the article draw conclusions or try to convince the reader to accept one particular point of view?

- No

8. Are there any words or phrases that don't feel neutral? For example, "the best idea," "most people," or negative associations, such as "While it's obvious that x, some insist that y."

- No

9. Are most statements in the article connected to a reliable source, such as textbooks and journal articles? Or do they rely on blogs or self-published authors? - Yes. The citations are a reliable source.

10. Are there a lot of statements attributed to one or two sources? If so, it may lead to an unbalanced article or one that leans too heavily into a single point of view. - No it is evenly spread out between both sources.

11. Are there any unsourced statements in the article, or statements that you can't find stated in the references? Just because there is a source listed, doesn't mean it's presented accurately! - No

NK1296 (talk) 23:33, 13 October 2020 (UTC)