User talk:THERooster10/Muskox/Kmerren Peer Review

Peer review
Article you are reviewing: Muskox


 * 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 including various images to each section to assist the descriptions and elaborations.


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

Added more information to the ecology and conservation status sections of the articles could potentially improvement the article.


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

Adding an image of a map showing their distribution would create a visual that ties together the range section.


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

Yes, this article goes into depth about the history and evolution of the Muskox and I think this could be a great addition to my article.


 * 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?

I am not sure where their new information will be added in the article, but it is a very good addition to the article. Including information on how the Muskox adapts to its cold environment is extremely important to know.


 * 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?

Yes, each sections length is equal to it’s importance. However, I feel as though the ecology section could be elaborated a bit more.


 * 1) Does the article draw conclusions or try to convince the reader to accept one particular point of view? No


 * 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


 * 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? Textbooks and journals


 * 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 sources are equally attributed throughout the article.


 * 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!

There are over 50 sources in this article. From what I glanced over it seemed as though most of them were presented accurately.

Once you have answered these questions, you should post them as a message on their User Talk page (see above for instructions on how to do that Kmerren (talk) 22:32, 9 October 2022 (UTC)