User talk:Jeremyseti/sandbox

Categories

Acropolis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acropolis

Column https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Column

ionic order https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ionic_order

column
Structure[edit] Early columns were constructed of stone, some out of a single piece of stone. Monolithic columns are among the heaviest stones used in architecture. Other stone columns are created out of multiple sections of stone, mortared or dry-fit together. In many classical sites, sectioned columns were carved with a centre hole or depression so that they could be pegged together, using stone or metal pins. The design of most classical columns incorporates entasis (the inclusion of a slight outward curve in the sides) plus a reduction in diameter along the height of the column, so that the top is as little as 83% of the bottom diameter. This reduction mimics the parallax effects which the eye expects to see, and tends to make columns look taller and straighter than they are while entasis adds to that effect.

There are fillets and flutes that run up the shaft of columns. The flute is the part of the column that is indented in with a semi circular shape. The fillet of the column is the part between each of the flutes on the ionic order columns. The flute width changes on all tapered columns as it goes up the shaft and stays the same on all non tapered columns. This was done to the columns to add visual interest to them. The ionic order and the corinthian orders are the only column styles that have fillets and flutes. The doric style didn't have and fillets, however it did still have flutes. The flutes for doric order were connected at a sharp point where the fillets would be at on ionic and corinthian order columns.

Peer Review
Your goal with a peer review is to identify specific ways the article could be improved, and note any major problems that ought to be fixed. Consider these questions: 1. Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you? All the contributions look good to me, I don't get caught up while reading any of it. It all seems match the topic.

2. Is the article neutral? Are there any claims, or frames, that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? Your viewpoints expressed in the article all seem to be neutral in tone.

3. Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? I do not think your viewpoints were over represented. However, I think you could have contributed more material from your sources to the article.

4. Check the citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article? The links for all of your citations work and they support your contributions to the article. They appear to be scholarly material.

5. Is each fact supported by an appropriate, reliable reference? Where does the information come from? Are these neutral sources? If biased, is that bias noted? He has his facts that he stated lined up with correct scholarly sites. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kade Greer (talk • contribs) 04:44, 11 December 2018 (UTC)