User talk:Olivia Jameson

Welcome!
Hello, Olivia Jameson, and welcome to Wikipedia! My name is Ian and I work with Wiki Education; I help support students who are editing as part of a class assignment.

I hope you enjoy editing here. If you haven't already done so, please check out the student training library, which introduces you to editing and Wikipedia's core principles. You may also want to check out the Teahouse, a community of Wikipedia editors dedicated to helping new users. Below are some resources to help you get started editing. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 16:24, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

Lead:
There do not appear to be any changes made to the lead of the article by my peer. The lead of the original article includes an introductory sentence that is concise and a brief description of the article's major sections without including any information that is not present in the article. I do not know if there are any plans for the lead to be updated as more information is added to the original article so this may be something that needs to be thought about as we continue editing.

Content:
The content added to the article was relevant and ended up expanding the information relevant to Ephrem the Syrian. It provides further context for the hymns that were written and women's choirs and helps expand the articles section concerning Ephrem's writings. Some of the information added is a bit difficult to understand, however, this is probably due to a lack of background knowledge on hymns and Ephrem rather than the additions themselves. The content that was provided is up to date with the latest source being from 2000. There does not appear to be any content missing, aside from the rest of the original article, or content that does not belong. This article also does not appear to address one of Wikipedia's equity gaps.

Tone and Balance:
The added or changed content appears to be neutral in tone. There are no claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position. All viewpoints seem to be equally included, as male choirs were discussed in connection to female choirs. This added information does not appear to persuade the reader to favor one position or away from another.

Organization:
The content that was added is all very clear and well-written. Nothing that was added or changed feels like it does not belong or is out of place and flows nicely with the content from the original article. After having read the additions several times, there appear to be no grammatical or spelling errors.

Overall Impressions:
The additions do a great job of expanding upon some of the details of the original article, providing examples of hymn cycles for information that was already listed in the article. You also added some great information concerning both women's and men's choirs and Ephrem's beliefs around this. I think one thing that could be beneficial to your edits would be adding links to any additional articles that can help the reader understand the context of your information if that is available. Overall, you made some amazing edits and it will be exciting to see how your final draft looks. --TreaBunny (talk) 12:41, 12 April 2023 (UTC)


 * I really appreciate your criticism and I think you made some excellent suggestions. I will definitely be going back to the lead and editing it to include my new additions and sections, this was something I completely forgot about so I appreciate your reminder. I will also definitely look into which short quotes from my sources that I could add to the significance section to give more depth to my article. TreaBunny (talk) 22:23, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

Peer Review
Whose work are you reviewing?

Olivia Jameson

Link to draft you're reviewing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Olivia%20Jameson/Ephrem_the_Syrian?veaction=edit&preload=Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template Link to the current version of the article (if it exists) Ephrem the Syrian - Wikipedia Evaluate the drafted changes

The added content of your article was very engrossing! I think the way you directly addressed how Ephrem's writings indicate his attitude towards women will be very easy for people outside of this class to understand. The portion on "the Daughters of the Covenant" is a particularly good example of this, as you tie Ephrem's work featuring this group with the larger cultural and theological context, leading to greater understanding of Early Christianity overall; explaining how the inclusion of women's voices in the church is intended to represent Mary was clear and elucidating. Furthermore, this context connects nicely to the Ephrem lyric you included from the Nativity cycle. I think it will have a clear impact on readers because of their directness with you approach gender in Ephrem's works and because these examples are heavily contingent on Mary, a very well-known figure to people even outside of the church. I do think you could separate the paragraphs when you start delving into gender - starting a paragraph with "One such hymn cycle...". You might also start the paragraph with an introduction to how to Ephrem's works contain commentary on gender in Early Christianity, even if implicitly. The change from general information about his hymns to the section on gender may feel a little confusing to readers outside of this class at first.

Pertaining to the bibliography, I think you could do with more sources. You utilized the ones you have so far very well, so I would love to see how you incorporate other sources too! I don't recognize any from the course - maybe you could use the Cohick and Hughes readings to give a general idea of how gender was viewed in Christianity at that time and region. Or, if it wouldn't distract too much from the specific topic at hand, you could compare his writings on women with other authors at the time. I think there is bound to be a hint of bias now with the number of sources you have, but I feel like this can be easily rectified with the addition of more sources. With what you do have so far, I do feel as though you do good job emphasizing that the discussion of Ephrem and gender is "perceived" and not fact, as say in "demonstrates Ephrem's perceived comfort level surrounding feminine imagery."

Your articles has definitely been helpful for me in evaluating my own because of the detail you put into yours. As I mentioned earlier, you took a very direct approach to how Ephrem touches on gender - but you didn't spare important details. You gave a great overview while being thorough and specific to the topic in mind. Using lyrical examples gave even further depth and helped to emphasize the views you claim Ephrem had. I hope to have your level of depth in my own article as I really enjoyed reading it.

Response to Peer Reviews
Hello, thank you so much for the comments! Your ideas about adding more concrete evidence with the addition of depictions of female orans were particularly helpful - I think it would definitely make my additions feel more substantiated & accessible to readers. Even more, I really appreciated what you said about creating/merging different sections, the directness of those comments gave me concrete actions to follow. Thank you again! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jpeashoes (talk • contribs) 16:32, 18 April 2023 (UTC)