User talk:Manisendra/Sable Antelope

Peer Review: Sable Antelope

 * 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 has an in-depth taxonomy section (especially subspecies) and a fairly good description with explanations with pictures.


 * 1) What changes would you suggest the author apply to the article? Why would those changes be an improvement?

Some changes I suggest are improving the Diet section by adding more information. Also, I do not see a clear separation of the Description and Behavior sections. I think adding more titles to separate information such as “Physiology” could be helpful.


 * 1) What's the most important thing the author could do to improve the article?

The most important thing is adding information to the behavior section, if available.


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

One thing about this article that I could improve on my own is having a larger Description section. My section is only 3-4 sentences and this one is about 2 pargraphs.


 * 1) 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?

Yes I think the sections are organized well. I agree with where they are adding the information. They are adding information about their water intake which relates to the Diet section.


 * 1) 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?

The Diet section needed more attention, so I think it is beneficial they are adding more information there.

I did not see anything off topic.


 * 1) Does the article draw conclusions or try to convince the reader to accept one particular point of view?

No- I did not see any bias within this article.


 * 1) 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- I did not see any words or phrases that seemed unprofessional.


 * 1) 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?

I would say there are more “Websites” than journals as sources which can be suspicious. I counted about 7 journals.

Source #14 for example, was a website that does not seem to be reviewed which is questionable.


 * 1) 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.

The only source for Reproduction and Diet are source 19 which could lead to bias of one source.


 * 1) 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!

I did not see any unsourced statements in the article.

Athib65 (talk) 05:00, 10 October 2022 (UTC)