User:Neuniceangela/Dorotea Bucca/Marinelise Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Neuniceangela / Eunice Nazar


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

Evaluate the drafted changes
In her edits, Eunice added a more nuanced understanding of Dorotea's affiliation with the University and her assumption of chairmanship following her father's tenure. Where previously the article only included a brief review of other Italian women in medicine, Eunice added five sections which more fulsomely detail Dorotea's life and the discussion surrounding her. However, at times the inclusion of scholars' names and credentials in the text of the Wikipedia article was confusing – distracting from the substance of the sentence. While in an academic paper it is appropriate to introduce information following a description of the scholar or source, in a Wikipedia article it was difficult to discern and differentiate between contemporary commentators and references contemporaneous figures. I'm unsure whether this is a relevant concern, but the citation should be sufficient to account for the origins of the information discussed. Her inclusion of scholars' names is a small portion of the overall positive trend in her article which reviewed debates and disagreements about Dorotea to highlight a lack of consensus.

Eunice includes a remarkable quantity of citations and references to scholarly material to support her article. These additions greatly improved the article not only by evidencing the information included, but by serving as a launch point for research or review of other Italian female physicians, women in academia, and the education of women. Most importantly, Eunice demonstrated there are several scholars who affirm the existence of Dorotea where the original article only included a reference to a scholar who doubts her historical existence.

Overall, Eunice vastly improved the article on Dorotea by reviewing the scope of her life within the context of her father's legacy, the time period, and in relation to other similar women using a wealth of scholarly sources.