User talk:Benitalukose/sandbox

Good information on the Catacombs in Rome with clear points. I would add some sub-headings and more examples so the readers can link back to other information / facts on the internet or wikipedia. Carlapicasso (talk) 12:55, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Really good analysis of the roots of the Christian Catacombs in Rome. Good to note how there were so many and their significance.--Henrykuv (talk) 18:03, 31 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Great use of facts! Just make sure you add titles/subtitles. I think this topic is really interesting. I am not sure if you need to say "additionally" in the last sentence in the first paragraph as it starts to read more like a paper. Cbettica65 (talk) 12:49, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

All the notes seem like they are there, but I think it would be better if you could focus in deeper. It would also be nice if you could have some internal link because they are definitely words that could include them. Bokyung0327 (talk) 12:52, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Topic is really interesting. Could add a sentence to specify that catacomb is a piece of wall art and what type it isDdurandisse (talk) 12:55, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Add a link to the article you are editing. Also the [2] citation, it is in the beginning of the sentence instead of the end. I believe it is suppose to go after the period. You could also link the wikipedia page for catacombs so you do not have to explain it and people reading can find out more about what they are. Oliviaohearn (talk) 12:59, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Great facts! I like the use of the picture and the addition of the sources. You mentioned that they the way they're found is split up into three categories. You should do three different subheadings to mentioned/dive deeper into those three categories. Otherwise keep it up! Miaeschlidt (talk) 13:04, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hey good job on your work. I feel like your paragraph is simple detail over and over. It will be better if you divide up the paragraph and dig deeper and focus on details to make your even better. I do like you choosing multiple sources to show credibility and research. Robertpark1999 (talk) 13:07, 3 April 2019 (UTC)roebrtpark1999[reply]

Good job! Maybe you can include the visuals evident in catacombs and explain how they represent the way a Christian views the world. Also, I think you should include hyperlinks within the text to allow better understanding of the topic.Awhite07 (talk) 13:09, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe add more information about the iconographic, stylistic, and technical and the phases, possibly as subheadings for this section. Also, maybe explain how the catacombs showed how Christians viewed the world. Fields18x (talk) 13:11, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

So far this section looks very good and is a very interesting topic. I noticed that there are a lot of terms in the paragraph that could be linked in order to help see how this topic fits into other parts of history and the site as a whole. Keep up the good work! Sophieb905 (talk) 00:15, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

For someone who is entirely unfamiliar with the catacombs in Rome, cross-Wikipedia links would be infinitely informative and helpful to my understanding. Overall, good piece but just remember that citations always come after the period following the information you provide. If you are going to mention several phases, it might require an explanation of what those periods consist of, if a Wikipedia link does not already exist for the category. Regards, Rapidrider (talk) 16:05, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

this is a very interesting topic and i think you did a good job, i like the added picture but just make sure to link key words Casey518 (talk) 23:48, 5 April 2019 (UTC)Casey O'Connor[reply]