User:Hhalpern2412/Renaissance humanism/Jdawson1925 Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Hhalpern2412


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:Hhalpern2412/Renaissance humanism


 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Renaissance humanism

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.)

Overall, Hannah's work was a pleasure to read and shall be an indubitable improvement to the Renaissance humanism article.

General Thoughts
The changes in structure Hannah plans to make to the article as she reforms it to create a more nuanced and well-rounded page on Renaissance humanism are excellent: good for the article's overall clarity, and adding some sorely-needed augmentation and editing to the content as-is. The sources she has aggregated are carefully chosen and well-suited to fill in the article's gaps. Specifically, her restructuring of the movement's afterlife and enduring impact will improve both the quality and navigability of the article. And the expansions to the "Definition" section are also integral, to bring the article up to wikipedia's standards in re. neutrality, over- and under-representation, ensuring that no one voice and view dominates the article content.

The change Hannah made to the lead image (from da Vinci's Vitruvian Man to an engraved frontispiece showcasing some of the principal writers associated with the period and the attitudes the article describes) is apt and appealing. Linking the names listed in the caption to their Wikipedia pages (Dante, Petrarch, Boccacio, and for the arms...maybe Eleanor of Toledo and/or Cosimo I de' Medici, Grand Duke of Tuscany?), or adding date and provenance of the image, would be helpful: placed as it is at the beginning of the article, the image, though significant, feels slightly out of context.

Garin and Kristeller Section
This is a significant, substantive addition to the article. It could seem like an over-focus on two thinkers, but the disagreement they participate in clarifies the nature of Renaissance humanism itself and extends beyond these two men. This is an effective use of the historiography: the two historians are used as a window to a broader understanding of Renaissance humanism, with exellently source citations and quotations, in the frequency necessary to allow a reader, whose interest was piqued by the efficient overview Hannah gives, to pursue the source and fallout of the discussion for themselves. Like the image, I would flag some moments where links to additional articles would be of great benefit: "quattrocento," "Nicholas V," and "Cosimo de' Medici." The term "institutio" might also benefit from additional explanation, but I could not find a pertinent page to link to that was equivalent to "paideia," so that may be beyond the scope of these edits.