User:Sdchicago/Adriano Castellesi/Khys2000 Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Sdchicago


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * Adriano Castellesi


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

Evaluate the drafted changes
I couldn’t find revisions, so I focused on the article itself: many of these suggestions will likely seem obvious, but I hope they can be helpful!

In general, the article could benefit from significant expansion. The lead is rather brief, and provides only a brief overview of the contents of the article: I would add a couple sentences explaining the two sections of the article. The article is structurally coherent, and I think it strikes the right tone (barring the assertion about his work with Latin, which I discuss below). However, I think that the point at the beginning of the article about sourcing is worth noting. As it is, the entry incorporates large sections of the text from the Encyclopedia Britannica article wholesale, and while it’s sometimes signified with a footnote, other times any citation is left out entirely (the ‘Works’ sentence on Latin uses its phrasing of “pristine purity” without any citation). It seems necessary to rewrite these portions entirely, as this seems to fall under the definition of plagiarism: I imagine this will be easy as you work to find additional sources. I also think that it would be worth expanding the section on ‘Works’ in general: even beyond the plagiarism, the aforementioned assertion that he helped to restore Latin to “its pristine purity” is both unclear and unsubstantiated, and it would benefit from a more concrete explanation of his contributions. It seems like there’s a lot of interesting material here, and I look forward to seeing what you do with it!