Toolbox |
---|
This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I have just created it and would love some constructive criticism and suggestions on how to make it better!
Thanks, user:gilliark
Hi Gillian, First off, kudos for creating a new article from scratch. Below is some feedback based on the article evaluation form.
I. Structure, format, and appearance
II. Content and sources
Please let me know if you have questions about any of my comments. Always -Jessie
WOW-you have done some great work creating this article from scratch. In your lead it could be confusing that you say the comedies aim to provide tears instead of laughter. I know that this is true, but a reader with no background might think you mean out and out crying as in a tragedy and wonder then why they are comedies. Maybe you could remove this wording from the lead and then use it in the elements of the genre section and explain exactly what this phrase means and why it is associated with the genre. It would also be nice to have a photograph up front to draw in attention-everyone loves visuals! I know this might be hard to find, but maybe a picture from a production of The Conscious Lovers?
Generally I think you have a strong structure. I would maybe recommend bringing the list of sentimental comedies into its own section at the end instead of under major works. I think that would help the article flow better. It also might help your structure to bring the environmental factors to the top of the article under the elements of the genre section. I think this would help link together the genre and what it is to why it is what it is.
Also, along with criticism, I am curious about maybe why sentimental comedy is not produced any more today. I don't know if this is information you can find or not, but I think it would be a great addition to the article. Also, maybe discuss why sentimental comedy stopped being written and reference other genera's that it influenced-this could be in the environment factors section at the end or even a new section of sentimental comedies legacy. (Again if this information is available-does Brockett have this-I forget).
I think you've done great referencing other Wiki pages as well as using a Nav Box. (You figured out how to put one in-kudos to you!) Also, I think you've done excellent job using references throughout the article. Jsattler07 ( talk) 15:05, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
This article is very well researched and a topic I am very interested in. Overall, the article is very well written and well sourced. Please let me know if you have any specific questions, comments, or concerns. I'd love to help further. MJ94 ( talk) 22:51, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
Toolbox |
---|
This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I have just created it and would love some constructive criticism and suggestions on how to make it better!
Thanks, user:gilliark
Hi Gillian, First off, kudos for creating a new article from scratch. Below is some feedback based on the article evaluation form.
I. Structure, format, and appearance
II. Content and sources
Please let me know if you have questions about any of my comments. Always -Jessie
WOW-you have done some great work creating this article from scratch. In your lead it could be confusing that you say the comedies aim to provide tears instead of laughter. I know that this is true, but a reader with no background might think you mean out and out crying as in a tragedy and wonder then why they are comedies. Maybe you could remove this wording from the lead and then use it in the elements of the genre section and explain exactly what this phrase means and why it is associated with the genre. It would also be nice to have a photograph up front to draw in attention-everyone loves visuals! I know this might be hard to find, but maybe a picture from a production of The Conscious Lovers?
Generally I think you have a strong structure. I would maybe recommend bringing the list of sentimental comedies into its own section at the end instead of under major works. I think that would help the article flow better. It also might help your structure to bring the environmental factors to the top of the article under the elements of the genre section. I think this would help link together the genre and what it is to why it is what it is.
Also, along with criticism, I am curious about maybe why sentimental comedy is not produced any more today. I don't know if this is information you can find or not, but I think it would be a great addition to the article. Also, maybe discuss why sentimental comedy stopped being written and reference other genera's that it influenced-this could be in the environment factors section at the end or even a new section of sentimental comedies legacy. (Again if this information is available-does Brockett have this-I forget).
I think you've done great referencing other Wiki pages as well as using a Nav Box. (You figured out how to put one in-kudos to you!) Also, I think you've done excellent job using references throughout the article. Jsattler07 ( talk) 15:05, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
This article is very well researched and a topic I am very interested in. Overall, the article is very well written and well sourced. Please let me know if you have any specific questions, comments, or concerns. I'd love to help further. MJ94 ( talk) 22:51, 27 April 2015 (UTC)