User talk:Nealthane/Theatre of ancient Rome

Instructor Feedback on Draft/Peer Review 2

Of Noble Berth thanks for an extremely comprehensive and thoughtful review. It's very clear and well-organized and provides lots of realistic suggestions for improvement. The only thing I need to point out is a clarification regarding the terms Hellenic and Hellenistic: Hellenistic refers to the time period between the death of Alexander and the death of Cleopatra (323 BCE-31 BCE), and Hellenic is just an adjective meaning 'Greek'. Grade: 15/15

Nealthane you've received an incredibly detailed peer review, and I can see from your recent history that you've already begun to incorporate their suggestions, so great work! You added such a large amount of content during your first draft, that your second draft was largely making edits, updating your sources, and adding smaller amounts of content - this is good, and I'm very happy to see a better source than that website, but you need more specific citations, especially for the first source (i.e. you need specific page numbers) so that people can follow-up and verify your information - for such a comprehensive page, there could be more sources! Likewise, since you mention many playwrights, it would be good to have primary sources included in your bibliographic references. Going forward, keep thinking about your reviewer's suggestions, and when you are happy with your corrections/revisions, update your sandbox so that only one draft appears in there - right now, because you have two drafts, the replicated citations (at the very bottom of the page) are empty. Some of your citations have typos, or are all caps, or have errors, so be sure to check those. There are a few additional places where hyperlinks could be added as well. Keep revising and adding, adding and revising - you're in the home stretch! Grade: 13/15 Gardneca (talk) 16:40, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

Instructor Feedback on Draft/Peer Review 1

Classicaldisappointmentuno thanks for your review. You give some good suggestions to your peer in terms of clarity, presentation, and content. My only critique is that your review is a bit short considering the sheer volume of information your peer added to the page, and a few of your sentences are unclear (e.g " With lots of information on the topics as well as added.") - for your second peer review work on being more thorough and straightforward, but keep up the good, critical work in terms of corrections and suggestions. Grade: 16/20

Nealthane you've added a really impressive amount of information to your page, excellent work! I'd like you to incorporate all of the suggestions from your peer reviewer, and address a few other concerns this week: first, your great additions to this page really stand out compared to the content that was there before. A lot of the existing content is uncited, so I'd like you to improve the existing information with references so that the entire page can be as reliably cited as your work. Speaking of citations, your 1st and 3rd references are the same, so you don't need to have two separate footnotes - however, I'm a bit concerned about this web page as a reliable source. While the info looks good, the page itself could go down any time, rendering your citations unverifiable. Moreover, that web page has very few references itself, so I'm worried this info has been lifted from elsewhere. Can you find a better source to cite for this information? Please let me know if you need help finding better academic sources for the history of Roman theatre. Keep up the good work, I'm looking forward to seeing what you come up with! Grade: 19/20 Gardneca (talk) 14:40, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

Note: Nealthane by a happy accident, you actually received two peer reviews! The other can be found on this page Gardneca (talk) 12:22, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

Peer Review Notes

Thoughts:

From first glance, this article is very well laid out. With lots of information on the topics as well as added.

Easy to tell this topic is of great interest due to all the hard research and information added to the subject.

The article was easy to read and put together very well.

A few run-on sentences that can be an easy fix.

Potential helpful tips:

At the beginning of the article, I think it would be best if it started out with what comes after Rome being found and it being labeled as a Republic. I just think the information in the first 3 sentences don’t relate to the article much, however that is just my opinion. I think it would also work if the article starting with “Roman theatre was born during the first two centuries of the Roman Republic, following the spread of Roman rule into a large area of the Italian peninsula, circa 364 B.C.E. It started after the widespread plague…” then continue with what is left!

In your first paragraph that you made, I would remove the parentheses “(“ and use the term "such as". I also believe that Phylace is the term for multiple places in the Attic World - Phylace = Phylake, a city in Thessaly, among other places in Greece - and not so much a term for a genre of theatre! However, I could not find it in the source you used so I may be wrong.

In the second last sentence of the first paragraph, I think “From 240 to 100 BCE” would work better.

Edited Paragraph 2, line 11 – misspelled “greater”

Roman Theatre in Performance:

The first paragraph you added could use another period or two. You have too long of a run-on sentence. There should be a period after “Greek ones. They were often…” and a period after “Orchestra. Both the stage and scene building…”

The second paragraph added, “Into one of three zones: the ima, media and summa cavea”

I feel like if there was a way to avoid the term “the article” to use it because readers will know if its cited!

Classicaldisappointmentuno (talk) 19:05, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

Annotated Bibliography

Nealthane this is not an annotated bibliography, this is just a list of sources. The sheet you handed in in class is also just this list, replicated, without the additional information about what you intend to add from each source. This portion of the assignment is, therefore, incomplete. You may hand in a completed annotated bibliography for additional marks. Grade: 2/10. Gardneca (talk) 21:11, 21 February 2020 (UTC)