User:HirokiTomida/Japanese rice fish/Lucanus-cervus292 Peer Review
Peer review
[edit]General info
[edit]- Whose work are you reviewing? HirokiTomida
- Link to draft you're reviewing: User:HirokiTomida/Japanese rice fish
Lead
[edit]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
[edit]Hi, Hiroki! This is Isobel, I am reviewing your article for the peer review assignment this week. I hope you find my comments helpful!
- Are you planning to add anything to the introductory paragraph in the original article? It seems like it is already quite detailed and provides a lot of basic information, maybe you could add one or two sentences that make reference to the Medaka being an interesting subject for science?
- Maybe you could add a new paragraph titles "Description" or "Habitat" or something similar, and put some of the information that talks about the Mendaka's appearance or life history there? This way, the introduction would be shorter, and it would be easier to find information relating to where the fish lives, or what it eats etc.
Content
[edit]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
[edit]- I think you have some good additional content! I like your paragraph on the conservation status, it has a lot of detailed, interesting information.
- Maybe it would be helpful to explain some of the scientific concepts that you mention in your paragraphs for "Use in Science"? For example, briefly explain what an inbred line is, or why they are useful in research, or why the sex-determining gene is useful for research.
Tone and Balance
[edit]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
[edit]- I think you have a neutral tone and well-balanced content in your article!
Sources and References
[edit]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
[edit]- Your references all seem very comprehensive!
Organization
[edit]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
[edit]- I think it would be helpful if you ask someone to proof-read your article for you, I would be happy to help! Some of the grammar doesn't completely make sense.
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
[edit]- I don't know if you're planning to add any new images; the original article seems to have quite a few pictures already so perhaps you don't need to.
Overall impressions
[edit]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
[edit]- Your paragraph on conservation is definitely a great addition to the article! Maybe if you could find a little bit more basic information on the life history of the Medaka, that would be interesting and useful.