User talk:Agoudkirk/sandbox

Peer Review! Hi other Andrew!

First of all, with the introductory paragraph.

“The Marathon Tumulus was a burial mound”

• 'Was’ feels like the wrong word to use. If the site is still extant, it means it still _is_ a burial mound.

“The burial mound —is— dominates the plain of Marathon”

• Just fix the grammar here.

• You Might want to change the flow of some parts. For example, “a column erected by the Athenians etc.” rather than “column that the Athenians erected.”

“both of which have become common after the First World War.”

• This feels awkward. That feels like a rather arbitrary example to pull as a time marker when commemorations of those who died in war have existed for centuries if not millennia.

• The paragraph about the Battle of Marathon feels a bit unwieldy. It’s larger than the paragraph that actually discusses the monument. While discussing the battle is relevant, I think trimming it down and linking to the wiki page on the battle of Marathon would suit it better.

“The Athenian Tumulus is the largest of the monuments on the battlefield today standing around 40 feet tall. It overshadows the Plataean Tumulus which stands 10 feet tall and the Victory Column which has since collapsed and been replaced with a modern replica both in height and in general mass.”

• Is the Athenian tumulus “one of the largest” or THE largest?

• I’d refrain from saying stuff like “overshadows.” That’s more like you’re telling a story, rather than stating neutral facts. Don’t try to ‘sell’ the size of the tumulus. Just objectively state its hight and the hights of the surrounding monuments you mention.

• Also, that’s a bit of a run-on sentence. I’d separate the victory column discussion into its own sentence.

“Both the Athenian tumulus and the Plateau tumulus have been excavated, with multiple bodies been found inhumed in the Plataean Tumulus and a large layer of ash and charred bone having been found in the Athenian Tumulus.”

• Again, a bit of a run-on sentence here.

Overall this is pretty good. I think it could use a bit more detail about the monument if there is more significant information about it to be discussed. Is there any imagery associated with the tomb or surrounding monuments? How do we know which tumulus is which?

Most importantly, try to start inserting your citations into the body of your article. It’s hard to tell what’s being sourced and what’s just your own conjecture.

Sunni's Comment

Overall your article is coming along. There are some grammatical errors throughout, and please watch out for run on sentences. I definitely think that you could go into more detail for your battle paragraph when describing the actual battle (it was VERY intense and gory). Another thing I would look for is if there are/were any rituals included when burying the dead. But keep working, you're doing a good job! Sunniobrien (talk) 16:35, 14 November 2017 (UTC)Sunni O'Brien

Comments from Prof. Paga

Hi Andrew -- this is a solid start to your article. Here are some suggestions for improving it:

• Include at least 1 image (the tumulus itself, the monument, a map)
  
• Include hyperlinks to other Wikipedia pages (like the one for Marathon and tumulus)
  
• Make actual sections for your page to help with the overall appearance and organization
  
• As Andrew (peer-reviewer) commented, you need to integrate your citations! It might also be useful to refer to or cite Herodotus' description of the battle.
  
• Including specific sections for the tumulus and the monument might be helpful -- you can describe each separately and comment on how they each commemorate the battle in different ways
  

Jpaga (talk) 16:40, 20 November 2017 (UTC)