| Toolbox |
|---|
This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I have formatted it and added more content. I think if I get more suggestions to improve this article it will be good.
Thanks, Sainsf <^> (talk) 07:41, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
- Comments
- I've left a bunch of initial comments at your PR for the Scimitar Oryx, suggest you check those out and apply any which may be relevant here, although this seems to be in a slightly better shape (technically).
- "The Dromedary..." dromedary isn't a proper noun so it shouldn't be capitalised.
- "provincial animal (unofficial)" if it's unofficial, is it of any use to mention it?
- Avoid relinking, e.g. Bactrian camel in the lead is linked twice.
- Consider using the {{convert}} template for your measurements.
- Image captions which aren't complete sentences shouldn't use full stops.
- Several dab links, including lifespan, diurnal, vocalisations, sandstorms, breeding, Indian and carcass.
- See also is well over-populated. Only include articles which you haven't already linked in the main article.
- References should not mix date formats and should be comprehensively populated, including things like access dates where appropriate, publisher, author name (last, first) and date of publication.
- The Uses section has a number of maintenance tags (like [citation needed] and [by whom?]) which need to be resolved.
I've reviewed only about a third of the article, but given the number of comments on your other PR, I think you have enough to be going on with right now. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:37, 17 December 2011 (UTC)