User:RaccoonEnjoyer/Kylix/MysticMythos Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

RaccoonEnjoyer


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:RaccoonEnjoyer/Kylix?veaction=edit&preload=Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template


 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Kylix

Evaluate the drafted changes
As far as the lead goes, things are looking good! I really appreciate the revision and slight corrections to facts, like the part about the tondo. It really polishes up what was already there and makes it look more credible.

Overall article structure looks good! I noticed in the to do notes there seems to be plans to put information about the construction of a Kylix in the art section. I would suggest for clarity to perhaps consider making a section that covers their general construction on its own. I don’t think  putting it with the art section is wrong, but readers might find it more clear if that information had a section of its own.

The article is balanced in coverage really well. There are no issues with certain viewpoints getting more coverage than others. A note was made that the art section is still in progress, and that was the only section I thought was maybe in need of more work, so it looks like that is on track even.

Content neutrality looks good, as different viewpoints are presented, but they aren’t asserted as worth more than others. There is no attempt to convince the reader of anything. Vague statements on behalf of others are not a big issue. There was one place that this may be an issue. In the etymology section, the following sentence may present an issue of this variety: “It is also believed these words may have originally borrowed from a non-Indo-European language, possibly the same one.” Are you able to maybe clarify with more specific language where/who this belief is coming from?

The sources look great as well. The links are all working and they seem overall reputable and relevant. There are a good mix of different types of sources too, which is really good. I think it might be good to see if some journal articles or more books could be referenced. The Oxford guide to Greek drinking vessels also might be a little over cited. Maybe see if some of those could be cited with a different source to make sure one viewpoint isn’t over represented.