Corina's Peer Review edit
- A lead section that is easy to understand:
- The lead section is easy to understand and is simple writing. Although is that last sentence, "Rubens also painted a companion piece,The Miracles of St. Ignatius of Loyola" relevant? I'm not sure myself but maybe a question you can ask yourself?
- A clear structure:
- As I'm reading from the history to the description and so on, I find this article easy to follow along and appears to be in chronological order.
- For the sentence "Next to the mother and baby is a male figure that looks similar to a figure in another art piece created by Rubens, The Great Last Judgement" in the description section go the article, is there a wiki page for this other painting? The "The Great Last Judgement"? If so, this might be a good place for linking it to here. As we want our articles to intertwine.
- Balanced coverage:
- The coverage is good and basic. Enough for an average person to understand, coming from an average person with no background in art.
- Neutral content:
- I didn't find any opinions or bias. Also it's great that almost every sentence is backed up with a source!
- Reliable sources:
- I'm only noticing once source within the last ten years but I'm not sure if that matters or not. Since this is an artifact century's old.
Great job so far!! (: I hope I gave meaningful insight!