User talk:Maren Connell/sandbox

Peer Review
There is a clear structure on the published page, and the writing that you have in your sandbox will only add. The section that you have written in your sandbox is well written and easy to understand. It also has a neutral point of view and explains everything very well. There are a couple sentences that I think need to be reworded, as right now, I'm not quite sure what they are telling me: the first one is "Capriccio works often surround architecture that have been changed these pieces of that of fantastical views," which is the 2nd sentence in the second paragraph. The second one is "This was aided by architecture commonly is composed of strong lines, both horizontal and vertical that can be analogous to other architectural works," which is the 5th in the third paragraph. Besides these two sentences, this section is very well written and gives a lot of good information. Everything written is also tied to a credible source, except for the second half of the second paragraph, it might be a good idea to add another citation at the end of that paragraph.

Looking at the list of artists you found, it's a good list but is it possible to add a citation on where you found that these artists worked in this style? Also, would it be beneficial to add a little bit about each artist? Maybe some notable works in this style. It's not totally necessary, but it might make it easier for viewers to understand.

Overall, you have a lot of good information that is very well written. Keep up the good work! --Ahennes2 (talk) 00:02, 11 March 2019 (UTC)