User:Citysymphonywiz/Aimless Walk/Liroel Peer Review

General info
Citysymphonywiz
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Citysymphonywiz/Aimless_Walk?veaction=edit&preload=Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template:
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists):Aimless Walk

Evaluate the drafted changes
The content added to this stub article is useful and interesting. It's relevant and neutral. The original lead section has been kept intact and I feel this could now be edited to reflect the new body of the article - for example the film duration it describes is different to the duration described in the new text. In fact I would suggest that you move this following sentence from the Reception section to be the lead: " "Aimless Walk" is an unconventional and complex 8-minute film [by AH] that challenges traditional narrative structures. It offers a unique perspective on the city and explores innovative direction and movement techniques.The film also incorporates the motif of the doppelganger."

The article has good section headings, but I think the content is a bit mixed up within them. The synopsis is great, and contains nice details about the locations. At the moment there is repetition in the first paragraphs of the Context and the Production sections. I actually don't think you have any new info about the production of the film and would delete this section. I would like to see a bit more citing of sources for your assertions eg that avant-garde art was flourishing in other art forms in Czechoslovakia in the 1920s.

There's an impressive list of sources but I can't check them. It's good to see various languages represented in the sources, but it seems worthwhile to have the City Symphony Phenomenon book there too, as it's an English-language source and this page is in English. I would suggest caution in citing a source you haven't actually looked at - I can see some where they have been accessed in 2021 so presumably not by you. If you have sources that look appropriate but are inaccessible to you, you could add them to a 'Further Reading' section rather than citing them. The sources that you actually cite should be possible for someone else to check if they are digitally accessed. When you add them using Wikipedia's citation tool I think it automatically generates a link.

Your contributions definitely add a lot to the subject and will make a much better entry than the current one. To improve it suggest you spend some time editing the draft, and then start formatting it using the toolbar above which gives you Headings/subheadings, the chance to link keywords to their own Wiki entry (eg the filmmaker's name; Devětsil; doppelganger), and the citations tool.