User talk:SacState2020/sandbox/Fountain of Neptune, Florence
- A lead section that is easy to understand
There is a great amount of detail regarding the mythology of the sculpture. It is great how you described it piece by piece because it reflects the most important information.
- A clear structure
Very clear structure, I was able to understand it from start to finish of the mythology section. Just a suggestion, the last sentence of the section when you placed, “Both the crown and the lash were a reference to earthly rulers, making this specific representation of Neptune symbolic of a contemporary ruler i.e. Cosimo de Medici, rather than an Olympian deity”. I really liked how you discreetly introduced the patron Cosimo de Medici but I think it would be a smooth transition if you place the Patron section after the mythology section.
- Balances coverage
It is pleasing to read that each section is equal in length and nothing is of unimportance, there is nothing left out from the published literature. The conclusions you provided did not sound convincing rather it was very informative.
- Neutral Content
The phrases are very neutral and are a reflection of various aspects.
- Reliable sources
The sources are reliable sources like JSTOR but for number, “10” I had to log in to obtain access to read the rest of the article.
Start a discussion about improving the User:SacState2020/sandbox/Fountain of Neptune, Florence page
Talk pages are where people discuss how to make content on Wikipedia the best that it can be. You can use this page to start a discussion with others about how to improve the "User:SacState2020/sandbox/Fountain of Neptune, Florence" page.
