User talk:Jersey gal202/Sawback angelshark/Tds018 Peer Review

Jersey gal202 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Jersey_gal202/Sawback_angelshark https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sawback_angelshark Lead 1.) The lead of your article is concise and introduces the sawback angelshark well. 2.) I would suggest adding a little more detail about the species, but other than that, it's a good introduction. Content 1.) I enjoy the content in your article; it's pretty relevant to your chosen species. 2.) The added content is up to date and cohesive with the species. 3.) Continue to add more information on the species, especially in the Status section. Tone and Balance 1.) The content within the article produces a neutral tone, which is optimum. 2.) From the reading, there is no apparent bias. 3.) Focus on the conservation aspect, but the given information is informative. Sources and References 1.) The information in the article is supported by reliable sources. 2.) The sources align well with the provided content. 3.) Be sure to include citations where they are needed. It's critical to include citations in each section; Measurements and Status are two sections that include citations. Organization 1.) The provided content is concise and easy to follow along; provides unique insight. 2.) There are no substantial grammatical mistakes. 3.) Overall, the article is well organized in correlation to the species. Images and Media 1.) The main article page includes the status, scientific classification, and range of the angelshark. The picture of the angelshark provides insight to it's appearance. It enhances the overall article. 2.) The images are presented in an appealing fashion. It's not busy. Overall Impressions -Overall, I believe the article is very informative and provides important information about the sawback angelshark. Continue adding information and keep up the good work!