Wikipedia:Peer review/Sentimental comedy/archive1

Sentimental comedy
This peer review discussion has been closed. I've listed this article for peer review because I have just created it and would love some constructive criticism and suggestions on how to make it better!

Thanks, user:gilliark

Peer Review by Jessiechapman (talk) 03:09, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
Hi Gillian, First off, kudos for creating a new article from scratch. Below is some feedback based on the article evaluation form.

I. Structure, format, and appearance
 * Awesome lead, great overview of the subject
 * The body of you article makes sense, but I was a little confused by the major works list directly following a reference to laughing comedy, Adding a label above the major listed works should alleviate confusion from the laughing comedy reference.
 * I think you might be able to elaborate more on structure in the elements section. The only bit about sentimental comedy I remember that is not covered in your article is that the repeated convention of lovers being separated by socioeconomic status and then united in the end by a discovery that the lower status lover actually is well born/has a fortune. If this is not in your sources, can you cite Amy's lecture?
 * In-text links: There were a lot of relevant in text links, but there may be a couple more that could be added. In the elements section you could link to verse (poetry) or blank verse depending on which is more relevant. Towards the end of the article, you could also link to comedy and/or tragedy, especially where you mention Aristotle
 * Would a snidely whiplash villain with an epic mustache be relevant? If so, you should add that image :)

II. Content and sources
 * I am impressed with the amount of sources and information you provided on this topic; I judge that it covers all the necessary historical basics for the topic
 * The article is a tad repetitive in the main sentiment about the genre, but due to the limited sources of the topic, I think that is fine
 * There is one point of the article that I found confusing, verse. In the elements section it is stated that sentimental comedies are written in verse, but in the 'essay on serious drama' section is states that the from is noted for moving away from verse. You may want to reconcile this for your readers if you can
 * I found the article very easy and enjoyable to read structurally and grammatically.

Please let me know if you have questions about any of my comments. Always -Jessie

WOW-you have done some great work creating this article from scratch. In your lead it could be confusing that you say the comedies aim to provide tears instead of laughter. I know that this is true, but a reader with no background might think you mean out and out crying as in a tragedy and wonder then why they are comedies. Maybe you could remove this wording from the lead and then use it in the elements of the genre section and explain exactly what this phrase means and why it is associated with the genre. It would also be nice to have a photograph up front to draw in attention-everyone loves visuals! I know this might be hard to find, but maybe a picture from a production of The Conscious Lovers?

Generally I think you have a strong structure. I would maybe recommend bringing the list of sentimental comedies into its own section at the end instead of under major works. I think that would help the article flow better. It also might help your structure to bring the environmental factors to the top of the article under the elements of the genre section. I think this would help link together the genre and what it is to why it is what it is.

Also, along with criticism, I am curious about maybe why sentimental comedy is not produced any more today. I don't know if this is information you can find or not, but I think it would be a great addition to the article. Also, maybe discuss why sentimental comedy stopped being written and reference other genera's that it influenced-this could be in the environment factors section at the end or even a new section of sentimental comedies legacy. (Again if this information is available-does Brockett have this-I forget).

I think you've done great referencing other Wiki pages as well as using a Nav Box. (You figured out how to put one in-kudos to you!) Also, I think you've done excellent job using references throughout the article. Jsattler07 (talk) 15:05, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

Comments by MJ94

 * Lede
 * "These plays aimed to produce tears rather than laughter and reflected contemporary philosophical conceptions of humans as inherently good but capable of being led astray by bad example." Instead of produce tears, maybe you can say "elicit sad emotions" or something to that effect?
 * "By appealing to his noble sentiments, a man could be reformed and set back on the path of virtue." Can you please explain this a bit? Is this the ultimate goal of a sentimental comedy?
 * "While the plays contained characters whose natures seemed overly virtuous and whose problems were too easily resolved, they were accepted by audiences as truthful representations of the human predicament." Why what plays? Would "while this genre" maybe be more appropriate?
 * The lede is of nice length and provides good information. Nice job.
 * Elements of the Genre
 * Be careful with the capitalization of the section.
 * "Heroes have no faults or bad habits, villains are thoroughly evil or morally degraded." I suggest you remove the comma and add "and".
 * "The playwrights of this genre aimed to bring the audience to tears not laughter as the name Sentimental Comedy might suggest." I feel as if this may be redundant and not needed.
 * "They believed that noisy laughter inhibited the silent sympathy and thought of the audience." This can probably be connected with the previous sentence via a semicolon as it is a continuation of the same idea.
 * Major Works
 * This should be titled "Major works".
 * "The best known work of this genre is Sir Richard Steele's The Conscious Lovers (1722)..." Best known by whom? Citation?
 * "Sentimental Comedies"
 * Consider renaming this to something like "Other works". We already know they are sentimental comedies.
 * Significant Environmental Factors
 * Keep in mind the capitalization rules of sections.
 * Consider breaking this into subsections. It seems a bit overwhelming.
 * Critical Response
 * I am a bit confused as to what the purpose of this section is. Can you go into more detail about who these people are and why they should be included in this article, please?

This article is very well researched and a topic I am very interested in. Overall, the article is very well written and well sourced. Please let me know if you have any specific questions, comments, or concerns. I'd love to help further. MJ94 (talk) 22:51, 27 April 2015 (UTC)