User talk:Ammit88/sandbox

Arch of Augustus, Rome Peer Review

The article is very well done. Good lead. The different views of the Arch are well laid out, without any bias that usually comes with synthesizing different scholarly positions. Even with the fact that there is little information on the Arch, many good sources are used and the work is well referenced. The layout works well. There is a good amount of hyperlinks to other Wikipedia pages.
This closing section may be better suited towards the beginning of the article: "The arch is not mentioned by Augustus in his autobiography; moreover, Suetonius and Cassiodorus report that he refused to celebrate a triumph in 19 BCE, leading some scholars to believe that the Parthian Arch might have been projected but never realized." Bringing up Augustus right at the beginning might be helpful for the readers. What do you think?
There are some grammatical things that caught my attention, that could use fixing:

"A marble slab long 2.65 m. and high 0.59 m." should be "2.65 m. long and 0.59 m high."
"A Veronese scholiast commenting on Vergil's Aeneid situates the structure next to the Temple of Caesar."
Some sentences are too lengthy.

Lschrott (talk) 19:59, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Peer Review - Isis & Serapis

Hey Kate!

I thought the work you've done so far on the temple of Isis and Serapis is very good. Everything seems to be referenced properly and you've added some good external links to the article which are always useful.

I think I found one grammar error somewhere, although I forget where now! Not a big deal.

I also loved the map of the Campus Martius at the beginning of the article with linked labels.

I don't think there's much more that might need to be added. If you had the time and didn't stray too far away from the temple it might be nice to have a small section on how worship in the two cults differed, how Isis worship and the worship actually worked in Rome as compared to Egypt. Again, this wouldn't need to be too extensive and could provide some more good external or internal Wikipedia links to other pages.

Other than that I think this is pretty well done!

Matt N. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mnayl043 (talk • contribs) 17:06, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]