Wikipedia:Peer review/Cannonball Jellyfish/archive1

Cannonball Jellyfish

 * A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for November 2008.
 * A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for November 2008.

This peer review discussion has been closed. I've listed this article for peer review because… I want overall review of my article. Thanks, Desert fox2009 (talk) 02:33, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Comments by Sillyfolkboy – I'll start off by saying this is a good, solid basis for an article and it's developing well. You should look to continue expanding it. After taking a quick look at Blackbird for reference, there are certain pieces of information that need to be included:
 * Who was the first to describe the species and when? (etymology etc)
 * Give a description of the creature, using lengths and weights where applicable.
 * Is the family Stomolophidae so limited or is Wikipedia coverage poor? If it is limited then there is sure to be more information expanding on its separate taxonomy etc.
 * What is its conservation status? (threatened? common?)
 * What are the main predators of these animals?

Also there are a couple of mistakes and omissions I noticed:
 * Typos: "Although Somolophus Mealegris"
 * Reference 7 states that this is also known as the cabbage head jellyfish. Make a note of the alternate name.
 * Remember to always list the sources publisher – sources 2 and 7 are missing this info.
 * What's with the strange citation at the bottom of the page?

You can remove the "cnidarian stub" template now too as this is more of a start class article. Hope this gives you some ideas on what to do next. Sillyfolkboy (talk) 06:27, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

'If you found this peer review helpful please consider doing one yourself. Choose one from the backlog, where i found this article or take a look at WP:Peer Review.'