User:Jsg4yMT/The Bridgetower Sonata/Sleepwhenyouredead Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Jsg4yMT, ConnorPrim, Skyking204


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Jsg4yMT/The_Bridgetower_Sonata?veaction=edit&preload=Template%3ADashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)

Lead
This is super nit-picky, but I feel like the lead is not very attention-grabbing. The first time I read it, I glazed over the entire last sentence because the monotony of "It was..." "It describes..."

I think that switching the sentence structure to put the engaging diction at the front would captivate the reader in the way that a lead should. Second, is there anything you could add about the book that is not just a plain fact? Anything significant, such as awards?

Suggestion after reading "Author>Awards":

I mentioned adding awards and changing up the diction arrangement to make the lead more engaging. Here is how I might suggest you change it:

The Bridgetower Sonata (Sonata Mulattica) is a historical fiction novel about the child prodigy violinist George Polgreen Bridgetower. Grand Prix Littéraire de l'Afrique Noire recipient Emmanuel Dongala wrote it in French in 2017, and it was translated into English by Marjolijn De Jager in April of 2021. It describes the early musical career of Bridgetower during the late 18th and early 19th centuries and tackles the issue of his mixed race in a European culture that was largely discriminatory towards people of color.

Author
My biggest overall critique of this section is the location and existence. The author already has his own wiki page, does it really make sense to put all this information about the author in a page about his book? I think it would be best to remove everything that does not correlate to the book.

To me, it makes the most sense that the Author section would be after the information about the book itself. This is, after all, a wiki page about the book and not the author. I think the size of this section, paired with the location, would probably be a little distracting and frustrating to readers who are trying to find out more about the book itself. It would be different if all the information in the author section was relevant and connected to the themes in the book, but it seems that it is simply just facts. At least, it is not stated to be connected to the content of the book. If you really want to keep this section, I would move it to the very end, as it is the least relevant and the longest of all the sections. After looking at the author's page that you have hyperlinked, I would suggest removing it. It is very similar to the page that already exists.

After looking at the author wiki page in detail, it seems that your author section is pretty much an exact copy of the author wiki page. I guess I am still puzzled as to why it was included to begin with when all of this information can be found somewhere else.

Literary works
This section is pretty straight forward. Again, I am not really sure that this is relevant to the book. This exact list is on the wiki page of the author, which you have hyperlinked multiple times in your own article.

Awards
Ah, interesting information! I think that some of this could definitely be used to spice up your lead. Instead of just stating who the author is, call him the recipient of an award. I have revised my initial critique of the lead after viewing this section. Again, this information is already in the author's wiki page.

Historical Origins
Remove the comma after “Composer” in the following sentence:

Bridgetower received instruction from Franz Joseph Haydn, an influential compose r and musician of that time.

-

The following sentence ends oddly. Maybe try “make a name for himself there” instead? The phrase “to make a name” just seems like its missing the “for himself” from it:

Bridgetower made his musical debut in Paris in April 1789, after which he traveled to England to make a name for himself there.

-

The entire second paragraph doesn’t flow very well. You start with the transition “first” like there is going to be a “second” or a “next,” but the rest of the paragraph is not structured in a step-by-step chronological manner. It does not seem to make sense with the rest of the sentence. I don’t really know why the word is “first,” I guess is what I am trying to say. Is it referencing his arrival in England? Maybe change it to “After arriving in England,”. The second sentence is a bit of a run-on. I feel like the connector “and” should be “but” to contrast that he is not primarily known for playing in the court. Also, whether it is changed to but or not, add a comma there. I think that it might be more comprehensible if you ended the sentence after “Ludwig van Beethoven.” Then start a sentence with, “He met Beethoven afte the performance…” I think it would be better to transition to the last sentence a little more fluidly. The idea of the falling-out sounds so abrupt that it made me go back to see if it had already been mentioned.

After his arrival in England, Bridgetower worked his way into the elite by associating with well-known musicians and other members of the upper class with the help of his father and later on his own. He often played in the court of Prince George of Wales, but is primarily known for his run-in with Ludwig van Beethoven. He met Beethoven after the performance of his “Violin Sonata No. 9,” which is now known as the Kreutzer Sonata. Records regarding Bridgewater’s life became scarce after his falling-out with Beethoven.

George Bridgetower
The first sentence of this paragraph flows badly. Maybe try, "In his early life,..."

What drive? The second sentence begins with "this drive," but there is no drive referenced in the earlier sentence. Unless you mean his father's desire. Regardless, there is no CLEAR antecedent to "this drive."

Frederick de Augustus
This was great! The sentences flowed very well for the most part, and the diction was engaging.

Summary
I really like how you decided to structure this section by location. I do not know if the book is actually written where each section is titled by location, but it was a good decision on you part to reflect that if it was. It really puts an emphasis on the traveling that Bridgetower had to do. Well put together!

Paris
Great! Flows well, good transitional phrases and engaging diction. One small typo--heirarchy should be hierarchy.

London
In the first sentence, clarify who "they" is referring to. It might be obvious to you, but to someone who has never read the book, it is not clear. Otherwise, great!

Vienna
Great! Engaging story telling is a vital part of a summary, and you did a fantastic job in this section.

Critical Reception
Straight forward and to the point. No evident error.