User:Gheizer/Ethiopian art/Reindeer.and.sloth Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

gheizer


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:Gheizer/Ethiopian art


 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Ethiopian art

Evaluate the drafted changes
Content

Guiding questions:

'' Is the content added relevant to the topic? ''

'' Is the content added up-to-date? ''

'' Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? ''

'' Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics? ''

Response: I appreciate that you have picked a topic which addresses a content gap on Wikipedia, and that you have gathered a good amount of academic sources to address this. You have done a good job in including information varying from history, geography, writing styles and language. Your research on the Khalili manuscript is good and detailed, is there any other manuscript that you could point to as an example?

Tone and Balance

Guiding questions:

'' Is the content added neutral? ''

'' Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? ''

'' Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? ''

'' Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? ''

Response: I think by and large your article follows a good neutral tone. These are just suggestions, but I feel there are some points at which the text feels redundant. For example, the first two sentences can be removed since this is an encyclopedic entry which can be referred to without reading what came previously, so starting directly with the Islamic manuscripts from Harar should be enough. If you want to mention the fact that the dominant manuscript culture came from Christian practices, you could mention this somewhere later instead of in the opening sentences (ie, after you contextualize the Islamic counterpart). The last sentence of the first paragraph, "The confluence of culture from both nomadic groups indigenous to the region and trade partners beyond, resulted in a style of manuscript unique to the Harari people" reads somewhat as a thesis statement. I think it would be better to present this evidence in your work first and then use this sentence later to sum up.

Sources and References

Guiding questions:

'' Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? ''

'' Does the content accurately reflect what the cited sources say? ''

'' Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? ''

'' Are the sources current? ''

'' Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible? ''

'' Are there better sources available, such as peer-reviewed articles in place of news coverage or random websites? ''

'' Check a few links. Do they work? ''

Response: The article cites all current sources, starting from 2015, but I assume that is because scholarship about this topic is new. The links work and they are all academic resources. There are also some points (like the final sentence) when a citation is missing. I think the sentence "The imbalance in representation for Islamic manuscripts compared to other religious texts from Ethiopia in mainstream scholarship while noteworthy, is not a reflection of religious demographics, but rather of private ownership" is very interesting, but it lacks a citation. Organization

Guiding questions:

'' Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? ''

'' Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors? ''

'' Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? ''

Response: I wonder if you might want to add subsections to your addition to the article, particularly for the Khalili manuscript. Also, some images might help anchor the reader in understanding what you are writing about. If they aren't freely available, you could consider adding a map or another contextualizing image.

Overall impressions

Guiding questions:

'' Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete? ''

'' What are the strengths of the content added? ''

'' How can the content added be improved? ''

Response: Overall, I think you have done a great job in collecting information about a lesser-known topic but could work on making it sound more like an encyclopedic entry than an essay. I do see that many of your sources are academic papers themselves and would tend to be persuasive / argumentative, I'm sure you could still use these perspectives to create a more objective tone. I'm excited to read it once you've finalized it! :)