User talk:Daylightandmidnightrain/Fontana del Moro

Peer Review

The description of the artwork is good. I see that you cite after every sentence (I am going to make a guess and say that is required). When starting the description section, instead of saying “It represents a Moor” I would suggest editing it to “The fountain represents a Moor” to start it off.

The marble is interesting, without straying away from your topic, I wonder if you can add something more about the marble. If that kind of marble was used a lot or if it was unique in anyway.

The history section was incredibly thorough. I had to look up what a balustrade was, maybe adding a simple definition before continuing could help with the word count as well as simplifying it so a person that doesn’t specialize in this subject would understand. The history is extremely complex, based on the commissions and the original reason for the fountain being made. There are so many people involved it was hard to wrap my head around! I was wondering since it is such a big section and will only grow, if you would consider using sub sections to break it down as you go. One sub section could even be titled refurbishments since you go into depth in the second paragraph. Another could even be specifically about the owners, I think that can get really interesting.

I was wondering if the iconography page could be moved to be more at the top where the description of the Moor is first introduced. In doing so, while reading the rest, readers have that background information.

If there was any more information about the vandalism, just out of interest I would want to know more and if it really affected anyone. If the man was ever known and such.

I think you did good job; I wish I had more suggestions but honestly, I think with adding subsections and moving things around and of course adding more there isn’t much left. I did not catch any grammatical errors. Really really good Job! Sarahputirka (talk) 06:42, 11 April 2023 (UTC)