User:Emmitross/Architectural mythology/Kermitdawormit Peer Review

General info
Emmitross
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing:Architectural mythology
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists):Architectural mythology

Evaluate the drafted changes
Lead

The lead gives a clear working definition of the topic and how it applies to Architecture.

It would be nice to see some lead in to the main elements of Greek Egyptian and Roman architecture that you focus on in the article body.

Content

The three focal elements of your article are well selected. Focusing on Greek, Egyptian and Roman architecture make the subject more assessable for most people, as those are three cultures whose architecture and architectural symbolism are well-known.

I would focus more on how each of the structures relate directly to the concept of Architectural Mythology, since you don't mention the concept directly after your lead section.

Tone and Ballance

The tone is excellent. Its neutral and doesn't try to persuade the reader in a specific direction, but instead lays out good information and maintains an academic tone.

Sources and References.

The sources selected seem great. While I didn't find the books referenced, the online materials appear trustworthy and academic. The quotations used add to the article, as do the images selected.

Images and Media

As I mentioned, the images add to the article and relate directly to the body paragraphs.

Since the Tower of Babel is part of your lead section, it could be interesting to read about its Architecturally Mythological relevance.

New Article

The sources selected are certainly relevant and plentiful. This seems like a great subject to choose as anew Wikipedia article since its applications re near limitless.

Overall Impression

What you have is great, I think that this subject is both compelling and important, and you've done a good job of laying the groundwork.

There are some issues with flow such as repetitive wording and some paragraphs that I had to read more than once to understand fully.

As I mentioned previously, tie each body paragraph to its relevance to Architectural Mythology to keep the article cohesive.

I also think more could be added, giving us a broader sense of the concept before diving into specific instances of culture.