Jump to content

Talk:Sarcophagus of Livia Primitiva

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

[edit]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 24 September 2018 and 14 December 2018. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Ntorres32.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 03:20, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Evaluation

[edit]
  • Points: 2
  • Grade: C

Spelling/Grammar

[edit]

Meets Expectations Grammar a little messy, switches tenses often.

Language

[edit]

Almost meets Expectations not always enclyclopedic sounding

Organization

[edit]

Almost meets Expectations Sort of jumps all over the place

Coding

[edit]

Meets Expectations

Validity

[edit]

Meets Expectations The links to other pages are nice but they still need a little clarification about who or what they are.

Completion

[edit]

Meets Expectations What kind of stone? Where was it located? What kind of art was it? What year was it made? No picture.

Relevance

[edit]

Meets Expectations

Sources

[edit]

Almost meets Expectations Only two sources. Could have a few more.

Citations

[edit]

Almost meets Expectations Citations should be in the paragraphs after the things cited.

References

[edit]

Almost meets Expectations two sources are from the same book. November 27, 2018 Emilenelson (talk) 17:17, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Peer review

[edit]

An overall decent start! Your final version, of course, will require a bit more information and structure, but you have some good information that can help lead you into that more. I would say add more description of the piece itself, its form and more on its content. Also adding information on the context of the piece, like when and where was it made? What was going on around that time to influence its making? I find it interesting that the sarcophagus was actually probably pagan, even though it looks as if it has Christian iconography...expand on this more! Your argument is more neutral in the sense that you personally are not pushing any of your own ideas, however, I do believe that it would be a good idea to add a couple more sources to ensure that it's completely neutral. I look forward to your final!

Edmahle (talk) 20:03, 28 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]