User talk:Moozicle/Flemish Hunting Deck

Peer Review
I think you’ve done a great job organizing your article and including relevant headings for your artwork! It has a clear structure, and chronologically it makes sense with the object followed by history and more thorough details on the cards themselves (their appearance and what was used to create the cards). You’ve done well with having neutral content as well, stating facts the way they are without drawing opinionated conclusions.

For improvements, I think you could move around some of the Sub-headings into other sections, such as maybe the “Pigments” and the first chunk of text that describes some of the methods used to create the cards under “Face Cards” into the “Manufacturing Process” as it matches more of the techniques and materials used to produce the cards themselves. I think the information would slightly flow better that way.

There are also a few sentences in the information under “Object” where the three sentences start with “The set was most likely…” They sound a little bit repetitive starting the same way, and I think the phrasing could also be changed to have a more solid stance on the facts being stated to sound more confident.

As for the sources, I did notice that a majority of the information added came from one source (from the World in Play), and I have the same thing with my article; it was recommended to me by our Professor to try and find more sources, either from taking more information from the existing references on the article or going through the bibliographies too from those sources as well. Having more sources that back up the information you provided will help make the information seem more reliable rather than relying mostly on one source of information. I thought this recommendation for my article was helpful and thought it could prove helpful for your article as well!

It would also be nice to see some more information about the Facsimiles, too! Maybe finding out how many have been made (if there are any besides the one mentioned) and where they are kept? Or just any more details that could be found on them if possible.

Also, maybe some more background on the origin of the cards (if there is any available information regarding it) would help provide more context and history I think! Perhaps information about how it ended up for auction, where it was originally discovered by who put it up for auction, etc.

I noticed that a lot of the text too is bolded, and I think they could be unbolded and certain bits of information that you want to highlight could be kept bold afterward if you want to emphasize certain points.

Overall a solid article! I think you’re doing a great job of adding more detail and describing relevant information about the cards. Keep up the good work!!En 2056 (talk) 23:26, 5 April 2024 (UTC) En 2056 (talk) 23:22, 5 April 2024 (UTC)