User talk:Mightybear17/Madonna and Child with St. Anne (Dei Palafrenieri)

Peer Review

Hi Maite!

1. The first thing I noticed is that there doesn't seem to be a "lead section," but then noticed the first paragraph of "History" reads like a lead section. I think that paragraph could just go before the heading of "History" and it would read very naturally. I don't have my lead section yet, so no judgment!
2. The structure is pretty clear, and it seems like there will probably be more sections added later on. I'm not sure what "Other Works" means as a heading. Like how this piece is linked to other works? Things in common it has with other works?
3. In terms of balance, it feels like ideas are still being fleshed out. I started to feel confused during the part about "the contagion of shame," and wasn't sure where that came from. Perhaps as citations are added at the ends of sentences it will become clear. Again, I understand we're still getting things down - my article is pretty bare-boned compared to what I plan for it to be!
4. So far, the article feels neutral, though sometimes I feel that I could guess at the views of the author around Christianity. But maybe there are some editing things that have yet to happen that will clarify. The "true human form" felt un-neutral, unless that's supposed to be a quote.
5. The cited sources do seem like they're scholarly and peer-reviewed. The References section is a bit confusing though, because some of the links at the ends of the reference lead to different books. They look like cool books though! And as I've mentioned, I imagine the plan is to add more citations throughout the article, and from more diverse sources. I'm definitely still working on that myself!

Thanks for letting me read your article, Maite! Good luck!

Nmkeith (talk) 01:46, 5 April 2023 (UTC)