User:Tofu jail/Min Chung Sik/Toyeyeball Peer Review

in second sentence you have a spelling mistake "Prior to Min's generation, those who wished to study photographer had to study abroad, many in Japan."

YMCA - maybe explain what this is / where it is located

he left many photographs based on the spirit of documentation - what do you mean by "he left many photographs"

"Overall, Min is a notable artist during the period from the 1920s to the 1940s, when Min Choong-Sik was active, was the time when artistic value was imposed on Korean photography, and it was the time when photos containing the aesthetic point of view of the photographer appeared in the photo itself, breaking away from the previous studio or landscape photos. " - This is a run on sentence

1929, definitely modernizing Korean photography - take out the word definitely

"Min served as a bridge between early modern photography and modern photography with subjective interpretation, he also helped to lay the foundation for the creation and spread of artistic tendencies in photography based on this. " - run on sentence, put a period after "subjective interpretation"

"Min photographs" - change to "Min's photographs"

take out the word "Overall" and "Lastly" - wikipedia articles don't use transition phrases

"As a pioneer, the article refers to pictures of the Yeondong Church, panoramic views of Seoul, and photographs of Mount Geumgang as a bridge between early modern photography and modern photography with subjective interpretation." - not sure what article you are referring to, wouldn't suggest referencing a specific source in a wikipedia article

LEAD

It does have a solid introduction sentence. There is not a brief description of the article's major sections. The lead is too long. Normally, wikipedia leads are very short like a few sentences and then you can break up the rest of the information into sections.

CONTENT

Could be organized by early works and late works

I think the article is a bit bias in that it reiterates his importance and impact he had. I could guess the perspective of the author and clearly hear the author's tone while writing it. I am not sure if it is because it draws too heavily from the sources used.

"Min allows us to approach his work through an aesthetic point of view, allowing us to read the essence of 'still life' art."

This sentence uses "us" which should not be there - maybe instead "the viewer" or "audience"

Also, there are some vague statements being made that need to be more specific such as "through an aesthetic point of view"

Someone without context of the photographer or about viewing art would not be able to understand this.

SOURCES

Sources look good and are mostly academic journals.

This is a good article so far. It mainly just needs more specificity in statements, organization, and grammatical corrections.

"There is an old Korean proverb that says that a hundred words of description are not worth one viewing. Alas, because of a biased objectivity that may conceal ambiguity, photography is particularly vulnerable to manipulation in order to serve different agendas."

This is an example of something that is well written but maybe does not belong in a wikipedia article. It goes too far in the direction of art analysis with cultural context. Wikipedia articles are the most stripped down informational / background information. This may be a little too contextual and deep.

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Tofu jail


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Tofu%20jail/Min_Chung_Sik?veaction=edit&preload=Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template


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

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.)