Wikipedia:Peer review/Orientalism/archive1

Orientalism

I've put up this article for a peer review because of comments that have suggested that the sections on Edward Said's book are inadequate. The article is about the history of Oriental studies in the west and about the ways in which the term "Orientalism" itself has been used in the past, and has come to acquire negative connotations in more recent times. The article covers Orientalism in both the sense of "Eastern/Asian studies" and the sense of "arts depicting Eastern cultures", especially those of the nineteenth century. Paul B 16:35, 24 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Personally, I have no problem with your treatment of Said's book. I do think, however, that you should list your references explicitly (web and print sources, alike) and link those sources to assertions in the text. I have moved Said's book to a new ==References== section to give you an example of bibliographic style. —Theo (Talk) 22:13, 24 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, referencing is a weakness, I think. Thanks for your intervention. Paul B 23:55, 24 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]