User:Artconnoisseur1/Portrait of Mehmet II (Bellini)/AveryScott6 Peer Review

General info
Artconnoisseur1
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:Artconnoisseur1/Portrait of Mehmet II (Bellini):
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Portrait of Mehmet II (Bellini):

Evaluate the drafted changes
I appreciated the detail of the first paragraph of your draft--it had a lot of great contextual information that helps place the painting in history. One issue is the lack of citations; these are really important to show where your information comes from, to allow other researchers to track down further information, and to meet the requirements of Wikipedia articles (not to mention the assignment). Adding these will contribute a lot.

In the second paragraph, I felt that things started to get slightly off-topic and jumped around a fair bit. There are some interesting pieces of information in here, but I think they would work best in the appropriate and respective sections of the article, not the section on historical context.

Additionally, I think it is worth combing through the draft to pick out spots that are really interpretations instead of facts. While some of these interpretations are intriguing, the purpose of this article is to present factual perspectives and not to make subjective arguments (even good ones, sadly). If these are critical opinions that are significant within the art history field, of course, they can be included--just make sure to cite them appropriately.

To my eye, the main thing to work on at this stage is the citations; getting these in order would clear up a lot about the article and help sort out what is subjective and what is objective.