User:Dullaten45/Sed festival/Skibbitybop Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Dullaten45


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Dullaten45/Sed_festival?veaction=edit&preload=Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Sed festival

Evaluate the drafted changes
 Do I feel satisfied that I know the importance of the topic?

Yes, the article provides an easy to understand summary of the subject.

 Looking at the lead again after reading the rest of the article, does the lead reflect the most important information?

Yes, it explains the what the festival was, and its significance in its religious and cultural context. Even though the "Feast of the Tail" is intuitively understood, I think it might be good to talk about the feast aspect of the festival such as what they ate. They mention everything about the festival except for that. I thought the sentences you added to the second paragraph were very good and brought more important information as to its symbolic significance which is the most important information for this sort of thing.

For the first paragraph of the lead, even though the book the person who link this information does mention the sed festival - searching within the book, nowhere in the book does it mention much of this information they are stating. Instead they just copied and pasted information from this website https://dbpedia.org/page/Sed_festival and made no attempt to resummarize it. A quick fix would be to just add quotes and insert the correct link to the information. It would probably be better to just resummarize it altogether though if you can.

''' Does it give more weight to certain parts of the article over others? Is anything missing? Is anything redundant?'''No, I thought it was pretty well weighted. It had a good balance of its political and religious significance, as well as what practices were actually done in the festival. The "Festivals throughout history" section is a little long but I think you might be able to add new information in different sections. I will talk a little more about this below.

''' Are the sections organized well, in a sensible order? Would they make more sense presented some other way (chronologically, for example)?'''I think they're fine the way they are, there just aren't many of them (only 2). To split it up a bit more you could maybe separate the significance of the festival and how it took place, keeping its cultural significance as the main lead. Or, you could find some original quotes about the festival from their literature and make a new section for them. The kings in the "Festivals throughout history" section aren't placed chronologically - It will start with Amenhotep III, then go to Djoser and Osorkon II, then to Akhenaten and Hatshepsut. So you might be able to reorganize them. I actually think it might look cleaner if you bullet pointed them so it doesn't feel too overwhelming to read and is more organized.

''' Is each section's length equal to its importance to the article's subject? Are there sections in the article that seem unnecessary? Is anything off-topic?'''It's not that the "festivals throughout history" section isn't important, but to me it seems more like information you'd find at the end of an article after a bunch of other important information was already talked about. Maybe you can find more different aspects of the festival to create new sections with, like some of the examples mentioned above. In comparison to the lead, it is much longer as well, although I think the lead makes a good summary of the information and should stay roughly the same length. You might want to shorten the paragraph about Hatshepsut a bit because it takes up more space than the others, but it's still fine as is.

''' Does the article reflect all the perspectives represented in the published literature? Are any significant viewpoints left out or missing?'''

Yes, I think it has a nice variety of sources that spaced out well throughout the article.

 Does the article draw conclusions or try to convince the reader to accept one particular point of view?

No, the article seems very neutrally worded. There are some cases where quotes may or may not be conjecture. Like the quote: "The ancient festival might, perhaps, have instituted to replace a ritual of murdering a pharaoh who is unable to continue to rule effectively because of age or condition". Although at the same time, this quote is admitting that it's only a possibility. The quote was also written in 1950 so it might be best to update this information if necessary (unless this is still a theory that has merit which it 100% might be).

 Do you think you could guess the perspective of the author by reading the article?

No, the information is neutrally written.

''' Are there any words or phrases that don't feel neutral? For example, "the best idea," "most people," or negative associations, such as "While it's obvious that x, some insist that y."'''

Even though the sentence itself was neutrally written, I think that including the authors name in the sentence: "Some Egyptologists, such as Jurgen von Beckerath in his book Chronology of the Egyptian Pharoahs, speculate..." is unnecessary. It feels a little like a promotion given that it was the only mention of an author in the article - even though I don't think that was the intention. I would just erase that part and keep the information. The source reference should be enough. Just remember to keep the "Some Egyptologists..." part.

''' Does the article make claims on behalf of unnamed groups or people? For example, "some people say..."'''

Haha on second thought maybe you shouldn't do what I said above. I'm not sure, hopefully Dr. Johnston can give a better answer for this. Otherwise no, there are no claims such as this.

''' Does the article focus too much on negative or positive information? Remember, neutral doesn't mean "the best positive light" or "the worst, most critical light." It means a clear reflection of various aspects of a topic.'''

No, very neutrally written.

''' Are most statements in the article connected to a reliable source, such as textbooks and journal articles? Or do they rely on blogs or self-published authors?'''

Most come from reliable sources but the sources are very dated. I think the latest sources currently in the article are from 2003, the oldest being 1907 and another from 1950.

''' Are there a lot of statements attributed to one or two sources? If so, it may lead to an unbalanced article, or one that leans too heavily into a single point of view.'''

No, as previously stated I think the sources are well dispersed throughout the article. Check where the source is on the last paragraph though, I don't see it (other than with your additions). I also loved the information you added on the last paragraph - good connections to Akhenaten and made his significance clearer on this topic.

''' Are there any unsourced statements in the article, or statements that you can't find stated in the references? Just because there is a source listed, doesn't mean it's presented accurately!'''

Yes, the last half of the first paragraph on the section "Festivals throughout history", although that may have been from the Wilkinson article that was placed weirdly. As well as the last paragraph as already mentioned.

Lastly I think that your article could use a couple more images, they're always fun to look at.

Overall it looks great so far and you've done a good job at adding, moving, and rewording information! I also appreciate that you underlined your contributions, it made it much easier for me. Good luck!