User:Juliahutcherson/Giulio Campagnola/Juliahutcherson Peer Review

Peer review
This is where you will complete your peer review exercise. Please use the following template to fill out your review.

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing? (provide username)
 * N/A- no student peer has contributed, I am reviewing the already-published article
 * Link to draft you're reviewing:
 * Giulio Campagnola

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer?
 * Nothing new added; the lead introduces the rest of the article well, but it may benefit from an addition about Campagnola's father because he is discussed a bit in the next section and the lead also mentions Campagnola's son. It may make sense to include his father as well, as these are the only two mentioned family members, or to remove the sentence about the son from the lead and just discuss his work.
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * It has one very long sentence to begin with much detail but no real introductory sentence.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * No, it only has a brief overview of what I would consider "highlights" of Campagnola's life
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * No, nothing in the lead is overlooked later.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * The lead's first sentence is very long and detailed with many parts; I think it may benefit from some simplification and breaking up of the sentence clauses.

Lead evaluation
The lead has some good information that establishes the basics of the article, but it also has a lot of smaller details, all in one long sentence. Again, I think it may need to be edited to make it easier to read and with fewer specifics.

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic?
 * None added- what is published currently is relevant.
 * Is the content added up-to-date?
 * Yes
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * No, everything included is relevant.
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?
 * No

Content evaluation
This article has a lot of good useful information about Campagnola's life and career, it seems there are some gaps in his personal history, but this is not a reflection of the author, rather a reflection of the historical record.

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral?
 * For the most part, yes. There is, however, one or two word-choices in the Work section that are more complimentary than objective.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * Nothing included is heavily biased, but in the Work section the author states that Campagnola "successfully" interprets the mood of the paintings he engraved. This seems to toe the line between neutral statements and a positive review of the work.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * No. Generally, the information is presented neutrally and factually.
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * No

Tone and balance evaluation
In general, besides the one instance noted above, the article takes a neutral point of view on the subject matter and presents it in terms of historical reviews and records.

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * What has been published is well-cited.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Yes
 * Are the sources current?
 * Some are from the 21st century, but some are older. This does not seem to be problematic, though, considering the material being covered does not depend on modern perspective besides the pieces about the work's survival today.
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * No, most sources are from museums and their websites.
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * Some links no longer work. Numbers 4 and 6, for example, are even noted to be 'permanently dead' on the article page.

Sources and references evaluation
I think the sources used are appropriate for the content being covered. The links, however, do need to be updated

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Nothing new added; what is published is mostly well written. The very first sentence is quite long, as noted above. Also, the first sentence of the third paragraph in the Professional Status section is a bit confusing; I am unsure if there was a typo and 'then' is supposed to be 'them' or what this sentence is meant to convey.
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * No
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * Article is well organized by sections, but within the sections there are a couple things that could be edited for clarity:
 * In the Life section, the part about his adopted son comes out of chronological order even though the rest of the section is organized chronologically.
 * A few ambiguous pronouns are used in the life section as well.

Organization evaluation
The overall organization of the article is good and easy to follow, there are a few smaller errors that made things a bit unclear, but can be easily edited for clarity.

Images and Media
Guiding questions: If your peer added images or media


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * Yes
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * Yes
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * Yes, all look to be properly cited.
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * For the most part, yes. The group of images at the bottom are not as appealing. It is also a little confusing that images referenced in the text as a group are not formatted together or near each other on the page.

Images and media evaluation
The images are definitely useful though they could be formatted a little differently for easier access.

For New Articles Only- N/A
If the draft you're reviewing is a new article, consider the following in addition to the above.


 * Does the article meet Wikipedia's Notability requirements - i.e. Is the article supported by 2-3 reliable secondary sources independent of the subject?
 * How exhaustive is the list of sources? Does it accurately represent all available literature on the subject?
 * Does the article follow the patterns of other similar articles - i.e. contain any necessary infoboxes, section headings, and any other features contained within similar articles?
 * Does the article link to other articles so it is more discoverable?

New Article Evaluation
N/A

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete?
 * Nothing added; the article seems to be mostly complete though of course there is always room to go more in depth!
 * What are the strengths of the content added?
 * I think it's really useful to know so much about his life before diving into his career. I also appreciate the inclusion of some information about influences and inspirations. The specific references to images are also really helpful in making those connections and seeing concrete examples of the ideas discussed.
 * How can the content added be improved?
 * I recognize there is a gap in the historical record that limits the amount of information we can access about Campagnola's life and work, but I am wondering if there is more to be said about other family or colleagues and maybe that could provide some insight to fill in some of the gaps.

Overall evaluation
This article is relatively short but gives a strong overview of Campagnola's life and role in the evolution of art from paint to engraving. His role in the advancement of medium is very interesting. While there is room to go more in depth, the existing publication is generally well-written and neutral.