Talk:The Procuress (Cranach)

What does the article (or section) do well? This article describes The Procuress painting well. The background information about where the painting was painted, who painted the painting and what is being depicted in the painting is done very well. Also, this is a really cool topic!

What changes would you suggest overall? I would suggest adding more detail to this paper. Is this paragraph the lead? If so what other sections are you going to create to add more detail to this paper? I think you can probably have a section on the style of painting, what is being depicted in the painting, the meaning of the painting and the history/journey of the painting. Having a specific section for all of these topics would let you explore each topic in more depth and detail.

What is the most important thing that the author could do to improve his/her contribution? I think adding more sections and information is the most important thing right now.

Did you glean anything from your classmate's work that could be applicable to your own? If so, let him/her know! The way you embedded other Wikipedia sources was something that I am going to try and apply to my own paper. I also think your use of images was very important. Having a picture of the painting you are writing about making the article easier to understand. It made me realize I need to add more images to my article.

Tglickman (talk) 17:58, 17 October 2019 (UTC)Tali Glickman

This article provides a good introduction for "The Procuress". Along with the accompanying image, the body provides a good overview that is very accessible for an audience not well-versed in art. However, it contains some grammatical errors and could benefit from a more explicit organization. I think the strongest improvement that could be made on this article would be to emphasize specific sections, maybe one on the history of the painting or one on current valuation and where it is now. The article should definitely isolate the references into a separate section. Fleshing out those areas would be a great way to provide additional context on the painting and make for a fuller article.

The article also does a great job at linking to other resources on Wikipedia! It was very helpful to hover over the links that provided context on the era and people and is something I'm going to go back and do more of in my own article. Dgoldsteinn (talk) 18:01, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

- Introduction

   - You currently don’t have a lead paragraph because it is under the heading The Procuress
       - that paragraph can be your lead paragraph! 
   - I think you can combine your first three sentences to create a good topic sentence
       - ex: The procuress painting is an oil-on-panel painting done by Lucas Cranach the elder in Germany in 1548 
   - I think you should explain that this article is about the history of the painting in the lead paragraph 
   - you describe what the painting depicts and what style it was painted in but don’t have sections about that in your main article  
       - I would add those sections in your article 

- article

   - good organization and headings
   - I would add more headings!
       - can have one about the painter
       - about the painting style
       - what the depiction/meaning 
       - or rename the article to History of The Procuress if that is all you are going to focus on 
           - if that is I would expand on the history. Maybe have headers for 
   - your tone and balance are good! I think you achieve neutrality 

- References

   - You have a good amount of references! 

Tglickman (talk) 18:38, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

• Gogi Chikovani.png

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 23:06, 10 January 2020 (UTC)