User:Faortiz1/Forensic astronomy/Duranandrew6264 Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Felicity Ortiz


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:Faortiz1/Forensic astronomy - Wikipedia


 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Forensic astronomy - Wikipedia

Evaluate the drafted changes
"Forensic Astronomy: Unlocking the Secrets of the Celestial Past" has been reviewed by me (Duran Andrew).

The article "Forensic Astronomy: Unlocking the Secrets of the Celestial Past" explores the use of astronomy in history, literature, and the arts. The author (Felicity) uses historical incidents, courtroom testimony, and analyses of works of art to show how forensic astronomy might be used in different fields. The goal is to improve the article's overall quality.

Organization and organization: To improve readability, the content may have a better organization. If possible, separate parts for forensic science, history, literature, and art could be included within the material. This would make it simpler for readers to get through the content and comprehend what each use for each area.

Provide more details on the historical examples given, such as the Titanic disaster and Paul Revere's midnight ride. Give more details about the precise astronomical computations or observations made during these occurrences. This would make it clearer to readers how forensic astronomy helped us understand these historical events.

Role in Art History: Extend the art history chapter on forensic astronomy. Give more instances and explain how astronomical analysis aids in the attribution, dating, or interpretation of artworks. Give more information about the exact methods or gets closer employed in this situation.

Finally, while the article "Forensic Astronomy: Unlocking the Secrets of the Celestial Past" has promise, it requires work on its organization, clarity, and content. This will become more understandable and helpful for people who are interested in the issue by addressing the mentioned points. Mostly, I thought it was exceptionally well but some missing bits that can make a huge difference.