User:Chitimes2/An Jung-sik/Ahmajorette Peer Review

It would be helpful, for a reviewer and probably for you, if you would somehow differentiate what you have written from the existing page.

Looking at the existing page, you might add more to the lead to describe the major sections of the article.

"Dating back to the 7th and 8th centuries, the Peach Blossom Land has been described to be a “mythic heavenly realm” that many people viewed as a utopia and wished to discover, only to realize it can only be obtained in their dreams."

This line in the Boat to the Peach Blossom Land section struck me strangely. Since it is in the published article, you probably didn't write it, but I would consider taking it out. The last line is a bit too fanciful to fit in the informational tone the article is written in. Also, I haven't read the source, but the tone of it is so out of place it makes me suspicious of plagiarism.

"respectable relationship" This is an odd phrasing and slightly confusing. Consider taking this out or replacing it with something like professional.

The ending is tricky. I see you took out the part about how his work was criticized. If thats a citation issue, disregard this, but if its a good piece of information, including critiques makes the article more solid and balanced.

In your version, the article ends on a sentence about him and another artist. You might consider adding a bried closing solely about An, so it wraps up the article more effectively.

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Chitimes2


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Chitimes2/An_Jung-sik?veaction=edit&preload=Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template


 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * An Jung-sik

Evaluate the drafted changes
(Compose a detailed peer review here, considering each of the key aspects listed above if it is relevant. Consider the guiding questions, and check out the examples of what feedback looks like.)

It would be helpful, for a reviewer and probably for you, if you would somehow differentiate what you have written from the existing page.

Looking at the existing page, you might add more to the lead to describe the major sections of the article.

"Dating back to the 7th and 8th centuries, the Peach Blossom Land has been described to be a “mythic heavenly realm” that many people viewed as a utopia and wished to discover, only to realize it can only be obtained in their dreams."

This line in the Boat to the Peach Blossom Land section struck me strangely. Since it is in the published article, you probably didn't write it, but I would consider taking it out. The last line is a bit too fanciful to fit in the informational tone the article is written in. Also, I haven't read the source, but the tone of it is so out of place it makes me suspicious of plagiarism.

"respectable relationship" This is an odd phrasing and slightly confusing. Consider taking this out or replacing it with something like professional.

The ending is tricky. I see you took out the part about how his work was criticized. If thats a citation issue, disregard this, but if its a good piece of information, including critiques makes the article more solid and balanced.

In your version, the article ends on a sentence about him and another artist. You might consider adding a bried closing solely about An, so it wraps up the article more effectively.