User:Rhein o

Possible topics:
1. Sofonisba Anguissola
2. Costanza Francini -doesn't have a page
3. Artemisia Gentileschi
4. Camilla Guerrieri -doesn't have a page

~~Dear Christina,

The first three seem to be very good topic choices. (I couldn't find much on Camilla Guerriri). The advantage of working on Anguissola and Gentileschi is that there are several good scholarly sources on them -- books and articles; the drawback is that it may be a bit harder to make notable contributions to their already lengthy wikipedia pages. But these are rated B-class articles, which means that there is still room for improvement. Either of these topics would provide enough very good sources to write an 8-10 research paper. I don't think I could say the same for Constanza Francini; but it would be a great contribution for Wikipedia for you to start a stub page on Francine (who otherwise has no page). You could do Francini for Wikipedia article and one of the other two for your research paper. Or you could do a deep search to see if there is more on Francini than I found at first glance. You could visit the SDSU research librarian, Laurel Bliss, for help.

Teacheurohist (talk) 02:05, 26 February 2017 (UTC)Prof. Keller-Lapp

== Chosen Topic: Sofonisba Anguissola ==
Research question: How were Sofonisba's artist abilities observed by other artists and patrons.. What was her role/what did she think her role was?
Proposed sources(so far):
1) Sharlee Mullins Glen, "Sofonisba Anguissola: History's Forgotten Prodigy," Women's Studies 18, no. 2-3:(1990): 29.
2) Liana De Girolami Cheney, "Sofonisba Anguissola's 'Ponce Portrait of a Young Man'," Notes in the History of Art 34, no. 4:(2015): 39-47.
3) Ilya Sandra Perlingieri, "Sofonisba Anguissola's Early Sketches," Woman's Art Journal 9, no. 2:(1988): 10-14. 4) Mary Garrard, "Here's Looking at Me: Sofonisba Anguissola and the Problem of the Woman Artist," Renaissance Quarterly 47, no. 3:(1994): 556-622.

~~Dear Christina,

Good work so far. You two clearly articulated Research Questions. Keep working on getting it down to one so that your paper is focused on one argument, not two. You may need more sources for your final paper, but these are very good, relevant scholarly sources that will hopefully help you to make a notable contribution to Wikipedia AND help you find more than one plausible answer to your research question. If you haven't already, start reading them now and noticing how they speak to one another in answer to your question. Notice how else they speak to one another and see if you need to adapt or keep refining your question or your research. In the bibliographies of these sources, see if there is anything you can read that is helpful/relevant. Very good starting work. Now it's read, read, read so that you can have a strong and refined Prospectus by March 21.

Teacheurohist (talk) 23:44, 3 March 2017 (UTC)Professor Keller-Lapp