User:GreenMoose37/Daswanth/Tactfulsitta82 Peer Review

General info
GreenMoose37
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:GreenMoose37/Daswanth
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Daswanth

Evaluate the drafted changes
(Compose a detailed peer review here, considering each of the key aspects listed above if it is relevant. Consider the guiding questions, and check out the examples of what feedback looks like.)

The lead in has been changed slightly, but still provides the same information. I think that it may be worth adding another sentence or two describing his work, because a lot of time is spent on this in the article. It is, however, clear and direct.

The content added is relevant, and definitely adds to my understanding of Daswanth as an artist. It could be split into separate life and work sections to help clarify the timeline and to provide a concise list of works. The article does a fairly good job of balancing visual description and also providing explanations of why these things were distinctive or important. I think that there could be more information about his later impact. There are lots of words used such as 'influential' which imply that he had influence on later artists, so adding some information there could be helpful.

I would say that it is pretty neutral. Aside from the points in the paragraph above it seems that all the claims are pretty standard, and there aren't very many value judgements.

Nearly all information has a cited source, but occasionally the end of a paragraph will provide additional information that is not cited and appears like it could be interpretation by the author. It should either be cited or removed. The Encyclopaedia Britannica citation is not wonderful, but seeing as it is only cited once, I don't think it's a big deal. The fourth citation to "MAP Academy" is not working. Otherwise the citations work well and the information checks out. The information in the first paragraph "After showing a natural talent by drawing on walls, the emperor learned of his talent and he began to be taught..." is not in the citation. It also seems unverifiable? I think there are definitely more sources available, so spending more time researching might be good! Here's one I found that might be helpful https://www.jstor.org/stable/3257529.

The content is well organized, and has good paragraph breaks. There are some small grammatical errors (weird periods, extra spaces), nothing that another proofread won't fix!

The images are useful, and well positioned. I do believe that both images are open source, not under copyright.

Overall I think the article is much better! The information is great, just needs some touching up of course. It is well written and understandable.