User:Public Scrutony/Collation of the New Testament/Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Peer Review

I really enjoyed reading this article and again many of these suggestions are stylistic comments.

Lead:

-Succinct and to the point; introduces the topic of the article well

-I would perhaps split the first sentence into two, just so it flows a bit better and then the logic is also easier to digest

Background Section:

-Great job contextualizing, I would again split the first sentence into two (or perhaps add a semi-colon and “however”) because it reads a bit awkwardly

Overview Section:

-Perhaps split into 2 paragraphs (split up at sentence that starts with “Valla’s analysis of the Vulgate...”) just for ease of reading and digesting the information presented

-Great use of a direct quote; I would make this quote into a block quote because of its length (plus it’s so good it deserves a chance to shine!)

-Avoid use of “thus” (a little bit too academic)

Influence Section:

-Interesting section, if the information is available I would all in what year Erasmus wrote his translation (since the other two examples include dates)

Overall:

-Great job with links to other Wikipedia articles

-Clear section headings, references are well paraphrased and neutrality is maintained throughout the article