User talk:Culrich115/sandbox

Article Evaluation
Everything noted in the article related to the artist's birthday and place of origin are correct and stay on topic. None of her information is out of date or incorrect in relation to the area in which her work was showcased or completed, although there is not much information regarding her early life or pictures of her and her artwork. The article is neutral and does not show any hint of being biased for or against the artist. Any of her artwork that is being talked about or represented is not being critiqued in the article, but rather dissected for the physical qualities of the art. The links to the article are reliable, such as that to PBS and any link leading to a biography or information about certain pieces of Antoni's artwork. The only link that can be questioned for bias would be the direct discussion with Antoni, where she answered questions in a Q/A format. Csu1331 (talk) 16:08, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

Peer Review by Meredith Guio
The article is laid out in typical Wikipedia fashion so far which is helpful to the readers. The readers recognize it and can navigate it well. I know you didn’t write it, but I don’t understand why it states New (Life) then goes into her childhood. I would advise to take out that portion as it is unnecessary to the article and just adds confusion. Add a space between banjo and player in your second line of text. Just say met her husband, you don’t need the future. Space between city and in 1997 in your second paragraph. No commas after 1998, exhibition, and Sincere Sin in your second paragraph. Space between In Sweet Bye & Bye, the comma and was. No comma after in 2011 in your second paragraph near the bottom. Through Jan 12- Jun 16 should be reworded to “from January 12 to June 16, 2019.” Also, spell out the entire month name. No comma after June 16, 2019. No comma after at an early age in the work paragraph. Space between Southwestern and Mexican in the work paragraph. No comma after Mexican artists. Space between colors and in in the third line of the work paragraph.

"Her many works in gouache, acrylic, and randomly-mixed and recycled house paints on found paper(often discarded book endpapers),[1]reflect an interest in typographic styles and symbology that can be traced to her work as a book conservator with Dan Flanagan at the San Francisco Public Library in the early to mid-1990s." This is a very long sentence. Look to break it up and make it easier to read and follow.

How is fighting an everyday activity? Do you mean verbal fighting or fist fighting? It may help to be clearer on that or just take it out. Work on the transition between your last sentence in the work paragraph and the other person’s sentence. It abruptly changes to talk about her commissioned work when it hadn’t really been talked about. Explore her graffiti side a bit more. It mentions it at the very end and leaves the viewer with nothing much about her time as a graffiti artist.

The article does not seem biased. The work section is not too short but can definitely be expanded on. Add in more sections, focus on expanding the article. You did well sourcing some of your sources, just make sure that all are sourced. Be wary of using newspaper and magazine articles as sources because sometimes they can be biased. Overall good sources. I noticed that the film Beautiful Losers is one of your references. That is a great movie and I highly suggest watching it. Mguio115 (talk) 20:15, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

Peer Review by Olivia Overholt
I agree with Meredith on the adding of several spaces between words and on the general layout as a wikipedia page. In the introduction you should mention what kind of work she did, or what the majority of her work is. From the end of the article I think she is a painter, but I am not entirely sure. But this should be stated right away as the introduction is supposed to hold all information necessary.

Sources are limited I am sure but could you look for more information on her inspiration? Also I know you have not gotten to pictures yet, but if you do not find any you may need to describe at least one piece in more detail. Maybe you can compare her early art and later art? I am sure that differences become obvious from her early years and the last few months when she knew she was dying. I know we have not done training on finding pictures but at some point you should add some in.

I agree with Meredith that you should expand more. See if you can find information about her graffiti work. Maybe compare her graffiti to her traditional paintings? Also the last few sentences (not your writing but it still applies) need a source.

The links to the references are not working so I cannot evaluate the sources. I am not sure how Meredith was able to see them. But everything she said about which sources should and should not be used is correct.

The article could still use more information. Try looking at successful artist pages and see other categories you could add. I mentioned adding a section on inspiration earlier. If you find enough information you could separate education and early life. Ooverholt127 (talk) 04:38, 7 March 2019 (UTC)