User talk:Olivervail/sandbox

Lead Section
Hello!!! I m your peer review editor.

1- I thought the first sentence was good! I feel like it would be good idea to combine the first two sentences together to make it super informative.

2- I believe that the lead section successfully provided background information and context. I could effectively understand what era Delaroche was operating in and what his significance was.

3- I think it was a pretty good summary of the rest of the article.

4- Sounded pretty neutral.

Table of contents
1- So I'm pretty bad at making sections so im not 100% sure if the sections re okay or not. It feels like the sections may be too broad or all encompassing. Although I think that may be okay if other people come along and add more sections to it. Maybe there could be multiple subsections on all the different kinds of themes that he painted.

2- Otherwise the sections go in chronological orderand help me navigate

Sections and subsections
1- Each piece of content seems to be where it should be. Each section seems to go fairly deep into the subject as well.

2- There should be citations. The parenthetical should be replaced with footnotes and there should be a references section with the appropriate citations. You can do that by clicking on edit and clicking on the cite button. you can also do it in the edit source menu by using the command.

3- style is pretty good

miscellaneous stuff
"Davidian Classicism was widely accepted and enjoyed by society, and as a developing artist at the time of the introduction of Romanticism in Paris, Delaroche found his place between the two movements." I feel like this sentence could be broken up into two sentences.

"Later in the 1930s"

I thnk it should be later in the 1830's :0

"(who was trained by David, yet found his greatest success in his un-Davidian productions of contemporary history) where he could pursue his greater interest of history painting. (Whiteley)" replace un-Davidian with another word or rephrase the sentence.

Good Job So far! :D