User talk:ShaoweiHuo/sandbox

Hi. I am Hiroki Tomida. I reviewed your sandbox for this week assignment.

General info •	Whose work are you reviewing? ShaoweiHuo https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:ShaoweiHuo/sandbox#cite_note-1

Lead Guiding questions: •	Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer? •	Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? •	Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? •	Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? •	Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?

Lead evaluation Hi. I am Hiroki Tomida I will review your article for this week assignment. Nice to meet you! I think you can remove this part from introduction. I thought it is too long for Lead. But it is up to you. “distributed across most of Europe including England, France, Belgium, Holland, Denmark, southern Sweden, Germany, Austria, north-western Yugoslavia, Hungary Czechoslovakia, Poland, Western Russia”

Content Guiding questions: •	Is the content added relevant to the topic? •	Is the content added up-to-date? •	Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? Content evaluation Do you have any plan to add phylogenetics of Sand lizard? For example, the origin and spread of sand lizard etc. It may be nice. Overall, I liked your comprehensive addition to the article.

Tone and Balance Guiding questions: •	Is the content added neutral? •	Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? •	Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? •	Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? Tone and balance evaluation[ •	Yes. It is neutral and all viewpoints are represented well Sources and References Guiding questions: •	Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? •	Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? •	Are the sources current? •	Check a few links. Do they work? Sources and references evaluation References need some work(remove the duplicates). But I believe you are still working on this part. I think you can click “cite”, then you can put URL of website, after that you can automatically get citation. This will include information like when you accessed to this site and more appropriate for reference.

Organization Guiding questions: •	Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? •	Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors? •	Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?

Organization evaluation •	I am not native English speaker. So I can not tell there are grammatical errors or not. But I think the content was well-organized Images and Media[edit] Guiding questions: If your peer added images or media •	Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? •	Are images well-captioned? •	Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? •	Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?

Images and media evaluation •	The original article already have nice gallery! No need to update. I guess

Overall impressions Guiding questions: •	Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete? •	What are the strengths of the content added? •	How can the content added be improved? Overall evaluation I think it is great. You may need to work on your reference but it should not be big issue. Maybe, it would be great if you put more information about the origin and spread of sand lizard