Wikipedia:Peer review/Michelangelo/archive1

Michelangelo

All right, I've listed this article for peer review because I want to get a comprehensive list of faults and areas needing improvement or revision before I go making major changes. I'd rather not rewrite the article from scratch or make major changes without a feedback from others. I'd like to get these changes made and this article nominated for FA status. I know it needs more sources cited, but what else can be improved?

Thanks,

VegitaU (talk) 23:38, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

The best way to find out what is missing from the article is to do research, research, research. Read a lot about Michelangelo - become a mini-expert yourself. Then you'll have a good idea about how to reshape the article and what elements of his life should be emphasized and de-emphasized. Hard work, but ultimately very rewarding. Awadewit | talk 03:32, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Well spoken (or typed, I suppose). I am actually reading a couple books on his life right now. My biggest concern is that I can't possibly read every book about him and it seems that the number of citable sources is more important than the information cited. Can there be a Featured Article with well-cited facts from a select few sources? -- VegitaU (talk) 03:58, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

It is true that you cannot read everything published on Michelangelo - I expect it would fill a small building. :) The most important thing is to discover early on who are the most reputable scholars and which are the most reliable biographies - what is the "standard" biography of Michelangelo? One way to do this is to ask scholars, if you have access to them. Another, more tedious way and the more usual way, is to start looking through the bibliographies of reliable books on Michelangelo (those published by academic presses, for example) for which authors and books are referenced the most. That list will give you a place to start. What are you reading right now? I would expect that you would have to read books on Italian Renaissance painting and sculpture as well as on Michelangelo himself, if you haven't already.

I think that there can be featured articles that use a few, select sources, but I think that the best featured articles are those that attempt to draw on a wider variety. See William Shakespeare, for example. I and another user have undertaken the monstrous project of rewriting the Jane Austen page. This is what our bibliography looks like right now. Michelangelo is a very big topic - do you have someone to work with? lots of free time? reserves of patience? One or all of these is probably a necessity. :) I'm really happy to see someone is tackling this article - I love Italian Renaissance art. I might be able to offer a few recommendations for what to read, if you want - I did take a series of classes on the topic as an undergraduate, for whatever that is worth. Awadewit | talk 04:33, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

• A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style. If you would find such a review helpful, please click here. Thanks, APR _t 12:42, 22 November 2007 (UTC)