User talk:Ab6047/sandbox

Ab6047 Peer Review
Your lead section was strong. I understood it quite clearly, and all background information was organized well. It helped to construct the rest of the article. You covered most of the information throughout this article evenly, making it a well-balanced article. I felt like it may have gotten a bit disorganized at some parts, but overall, very nice. Your sources seemed a bit sketchy, but the information seems to be real. I would have liked to have seen you use some news articles, journals, and especially some book sitting. I know in your sandbox, you had said that there was a lot of information in textbooks, so I do not know why you did not use these.

The sections throughout this had a lot of great information, although I felt like it lacked the information about the squares architecture. Otherwise, it explained the use of this square quite well. I would have liked to have seen the styles of architecture, and the history of its composition. Alongside of that, the information was rich and well covered, but it was a bit unorganized. I felt like I had to piece it together in some parts. Each sections length was balanced, and I did not feel like I had to read a ton. Overall, good job balancing the information and the read length.

All in all, this was a strong article. I feel like, for Wikipedia, the objective is to get the basics of the topic in a quick read. You could have articulated on the architecture a bit more, but this is a history course. You did exactly that. You gave a clear opening and a short, to the point, article that helped me understand this monumental area. Good job on all your hard work.