Wikipedia:Peer review/Chinese art/archive1

This article looks very close to FA status, but still needs a bit of work. --AllyUnion (talk) 06:32, 6 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Well I saw your request sitting there patiently, waiting for someone to look at it. I happily obliged. Well... My personal opinion is: The opening paragraph "Chinese art is art....etc", needs major reworking as it is both irrelevant in some places & confusing on the whole. It should either be deleted all together or start with a brief overview of the timeline of Chinese art or something similar. The content is very broad & covers a wide range of Chinese art. Some areas, such as performing Chinese arts, need a bit more depth & research to delve deeper into the subject. Some internal links need creating so that every red link is blue. I would also suggest some horizontal bars to separate the performing arts, sculpture, painting etc, areas more clearly. Although it may be a problem, I would like to see a couple more pictures towards the beginning, just to spice it up. But other than that, you could add a simple timeline to the begininning (E.G: ???? BC- This painter was born. ???? BC- This guy created this piece of art. ???? BC- This artist died. ???? BC- This city reached a golden age. ???? AD- This event influenced Chinese art.). I think the article is very well done, but with these & possibly a few more tweeks & adjustments, it will be a FA in no time. Good work. Spawn Man 14:36, 9 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Couple of problems with the images. Requests for larger images are a common question asked in the wikipedia mailbox, since our software autoscales you should always use the larges images possible. Generally I like to see images at least 1200 pixels in their largest axis, and preferably larger. All of the images are too small. Also, all of the images look like they are copyvio or at least of questionable status. Further, I would prefer to see some more images in a featured article on a subject related to art. In an article about art, I would consider image quality to be critical and would oppose this facinating article as a result. --Gmaxwell 04:04, 13 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

For an article on art, we need many more good quality images. At least one otr two per dynasty/period. Check http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Art_of_China ≈ jossi ≈ 23:29, 20 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]