User talk:Kkukucka/sandbox

Naomi's peer review

 * The lead is great; explains the significance without summarizing. My only suggestion is to break up some very long sentences.
 * The structure of the rest of the article could be improved. This is probably the single most important thing to improve the article. "Background" doesn't seem like a good description of what this section is; maybe split it up into Precedents, Motivation, History, Harriet Bowdler's Role, etc.? Also, is it really important to have the whole table of contents for each edition? Even if it is (which is your call), you probably don't need to be quite so zealous with the citations here -- it looks pretty goofy, and I think the article would appear more professional if you just put external links to the actual works as its own section.
 * Speaking of which, add a section with links to the actual works!
 * This is a small comment, but these sentences don't flow logically, because the Inquisition censor doesn't seem to add material:

The Bowdlers were not the first to undertake such a project, but their commitment to not augmenting or adding to Shakespeare's text, instead only removing sensitive material, differentiated The Family Shakespeare from the works of earlier editors. A Folger collection second folio (1632) went under the pen of a censor for the Holy Office in Spain, Guillermo Sanchez, who blacked out and redacted large swaths of Shakespeare's verses and cut Measure for Measure out entirely.
 * Another small comment: you put punctuation outside quotes a lot. I think the standard style is inside.
 * Balance and neutrality are excellent.
 * Your citations are, by and large, great and thorough. I have a few comments, though. There's no source for this quote: As said by the poet Algernon Charles Swinburne, "More nauseous and more foolish cant was never chattered than that which would deride the memory or depreciate the merits of Bowdler. No man ever did better service to Shakespeare than the man who made it possible to put him into the hands of intelligent and imaginative children". Also, the citation to "Acts of Omission" (#12) is not a particularly credible source, since it's just some publicity from American University about the research a professor is doing. Either cite the actual publication of scholarly work, or find the information from another source.
 * As a reader, I'd be interested to see an example of one of Bowdler's expurgations. Is there one that's particularly famous or iconic?
 * Oh, one more thing: you should add some links inside your article. One that stands out is when you talk about the Spanish Inquisition -- that should definitely have a link. Naomissweeting (talk) 13:59, 16 November 2018 (UTC)