User:Tactfulsitta82/Ottoman miniature/Pickwickwoop Peer Review

General info
Tactfulsitta82, Bumblebeatrice
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:Tactfulsitta82/Ottoman miniature
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Ottoman miniature

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.)

The think that the line "it is important to recognize how Ottoman miniatures have separated themselves from their Persian influences" should be reworded to state the fact that Ottoman miniatures have separated themselves, because saying that it is important is not necessarily objective.

The addition in the "Movement Into Art" section reads a bit like you are presenting evidence for a claim. The information is great but I try rewording some of it to sound less like a paper and more of a summary of the information.

I think the section "Western Influence" would work better in paragraph format rather than in bullet points just for the sake of consistency with the rest of the article. Since it is not a list I don't think it warrants the bullet point format.

Overall the article looks great! There is a lot of helpful information and I think the added sections are successful. I would just check the tone of the additions and the formatting of the one section to make sure everything is consistent and matches the article as a whole.

Editor 2 - I really like the way the article is built, and how dense in information it is. The lead has been very well written and I think it introduces the subject well and sparks the interest of the reader without exposing too much info. It is concise and straightforward !

I think the content is overall very dense which is great. I would maybe just merge the "Western Influence" section with the "Movement into Art", that way there won't be disproportionality for this part compared to the rest. It is just a suggestion, because you might find more information later on !

I find it very good that you exposed different arguments throughout the article as it enhances the "neutral" aspect. For this line "It is argued, however, that the manuscripts created were instead sought by members of the Ottoman and Safavid courts.", I would maybe just suggest that you dive a bit further into this argument by like citing a source or a person that advances that argument. I think it would be a bit more smooth as a transition with the other sections.