Wikipedia:Peer review/Epic theatre/archive2

Epic theatre
I've listed this article for peer review because I wish to get feedback on my article and the ways in which I can improve it.
 * Previous peer review

Thanks, Emmaosmundson (talk) 02:13, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

Peer Review 2018
Hi Emma!

This is a dense page! After reading it it seems like there may be opportunities to add some different sections to break up all the text? For example, maybe one could be "elements of epic theatre" or maybe there could be a "key figures" section? I think the information on the page is relevant and important, but hard to digest in the way the page is set up now.

Other than reformatting, I think in general, some more research and information in general would serve the page. I think the page has a lot of valuable information right now and that with some more edits, this will be a really helpful article!

Aoifemahood (talk) 05:02, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

Peer Review
Great start Emma! Here are a few suggestions for improving the article. The article has a great introduction and provides a comprehensive overview of what Epic Theatre is however about halfway into the second paragraph it begins to talk specifically about techniques associated with Epic Theatre and Brechtian theories. This might be too “in the weeds” for an introductory paragraph. Adding additional subheadings and expanding this information would help the reader navigate the article better. A section discussing the History of Epic Theatre, Major Productions, and even subheadings that cover some of the primary techniques that are common in Epic theatre could be some possibilities. Additional visual elements could be added to enhance the article for example a picture of “non-realistic scenic design” to show the reader what scenic design of Epic Theatre might have looked like. The article is well written and understandable. It definitely provides a great start to build upon as you enhance the article. The article also does a great job utilizing internal links to provide the reader additional information within Wikipedia and the content is well cited. The External Links section is sparse and could be expanded with additional resources.Stories Alive (talk) 03:28, 13 April 2018 (UTC)