User:Pick27/Shakespeare's Queer Sonnets/Plantbella Peer Review

General info
Matchabobafettc, Pick27
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing:No draft available. Reviewing published article created by classmate.
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists):Shakespeare's Queer Sonnets

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.)

Lede

The lede for this article is pretty long. It might be good to focus the opening sentence on the queer sonnets. Consider linking to the Wikipedia page for William Shakespeare instead of filling the lede with background info, and jump right into something along the lines of "A series of sonnets by 14th Century poet William Shakespeare faced ambiguity and discussion by scholars who read them through a queer lens."

Content

Sentences (or at least sentence fragments) are repeated in each section (see "Up until the 1780’s the main publication of Shakespeare’s sonnets was done by John Benson, who reordered and interfered with many of the sonnets," under both Interpretations and Organization and Publication and Reorganization. Be careful you're not using information more than once.

Tone and balance

This article reads more like an essay than an encyclopedia page. Consider removing phrases such as "an important aspect of understanding is..." and adjectives referencing sonnets like "desperate and angry" that aren't attributed to scholars.

Sources and references

Not all information in this article is cited. Some information is portrayed as opinion and not directed to a specific source. For example, the line, "There was worry of him being seen as queer or as a sodomite, and these fears raised enough moral panic..." is not attributed to anyone. There is no evidence linked here that Shakespeare was queer, and Wikipedia expects us to find scholars who link this information to another historical event (moral panic), rather than doing it ourselves.

Organization

It might be helpful to reorganize this article. For example, a section on historical context could include background info on the Buggery Act, a subheading for content could look at the specific contested content within the sonnets, and a section on reception could be a good place for factual information about the way people responded to it, or how scholars interpret the sonnets.

Images and media

The first three images are great! They could benefit from a citation or direct context linking them to the article.

I'm not entirely sure how the Charles Sorel illustration connects to the content of the sonnets. It might be wise to add some more context or delete it.

New articles

You've got a long list of sources, but I think you need to connect them a little more specifically to the opinions in your article. Remember, Wikipedia doesn't like when we insert our own opinions. Rather than a stylized essay format, try including "just the facts," one after another and see where that takes you.

To meet the Wikipedia notability requirements, try synthesizing your information down to only the things you can prove. You can't prove the sonnets were queer in nature, but you can prove scholars believe they could be. The notable thing here isn't that Shakespeare wrote sonnets, but the historical discourse about queering them.

Overall impressions

You've clearly put a lot of work into this article! I'm really impressed by the dedication to this topic. I can imagine it's hard to write an enyclopedia entry about something that is contested without including personal opinion.