User talk:Heppnean/sandbox

Peer-Feedback

Overall the article is very good. It is well written, the structure is superb, and covers the topic well. The lead section/sentence is very good, but it does seem to be lacking pictures. I see that there is one near the bottom of the article, but I feel that it would be good to have one at the top or at least in the "Description" section. It's organized well with clear headings and subheadings, and the content is fairly well balanced. The article doesn't really feel like it's lacking anything in terms of detail, so I would say that this feels pretty complete. Good Job!

Hall3jl (talk) 00:41, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

Peer-Feedback, pt. 2: Electric Boogaloo

I like the variety of headings used. They help to organize the page into easily readable chunks and make it simple to find what I'm looking for. When I first looked at this, I thought that this article could definitely benefit from more wikilinks. You seem to have taken that advice, so good job there. The organization of the information in the Description section feels a little wonky (e.g, you mention their distinctive black stripe in the main paragraph, rather than in the "Distinctive Characteristics" subheading). It might also be worth mentioning some of those distinctive characteristics in the Species heading, to support the sentence about UCLA scientists deciding that it is its own species. Other than little ticky-tack things like that, I like it. It's well-written, well-sourced, well-cited, neutral, and simply worded (although I might make it clear that felids are cats).

TheBoatGuy (talk) 01:54, 16 March 2019 (UTC)