User talk:Malgam/Big brown bat

Peer Review

 * 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?
 * 2) I think the article does a good job of presenting the information in a clear way. I only had to read the paragraph once to understand what was being said and it does a great job of presenting the information to the target audience.
 * 3) What changes would you suggest the author apply to the article? Why would those changes be an improvement?
 * 4) I would suggest maybe adding a bit more of an explanation as to the “how” of it. I understand what is being done and why but using the information regarding blood distribution might be helpful to understand why.
 * 5) What's the most important thing the author could do to improve the article?
 * 6) Bringing in that information would make the paragraph more cohesive in my eyes but it is already very good and clear.
 * 7) Did you notice anything about the article you reviewed that could be applicable to your own article? Let them know!
 * 8) I had trouble getting rid of the science lingo in my article so seeing yours helped me think of ways to state my information in a more clear and understandable way.

Amatthews31 (talk) 04:38, 16 October 2023 (UTC)

Peer Review

 * 1) There are a lot of topics and plenty of information under each topic. This article goes far as showing the relationship these bats have to people. Like I stated before, there’s plenty of information.
 * 2) The article is well developed so I don’t see where you could add anymore information.
 * 3) Adding the paragraph you created will add more information. It’s a unique fact that hasn’t been stated.
 * 4) My article doesn’t have as many topics as this one so I can see that there’s a lot of potential for mine.

Chassgraves (talk) 06:52, 16 October 2023 (UTC)