Talk:Margaret Sixel

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Cincinnatus.Seen. Peer reviewers: Vorkapich, Cinemazing.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 00:32, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Margaret Sixel entry reviewed
After reviewing and editing the Margaret Sixel entry, I have found that the information provided is helpful and well formatted. My editing consisted mostly of adding internal links to other wiki pages to expand the possible information a reader could encounter. I also tidied up the citation formatting so that it remained consistent throughout the entry. (period placement) While most of the information provided is helpful, here are a few things you could add to the entry: you could add more information about her career, you could add synopses to the major films that she contributed to, you could also add more external links to webpages such as the filmmaker's own page or interviews with the filmmaker. Also if the filmmaker has won any awards, you could add that to the entry. Perhaps consider changing the oder of the headings in your entry. You could move the 'personal life section' to the top of the page under the introduction paragraph. Also the information provided under the heading 'creative influence' seems more relevant to be placed under the 'career' heading. Overall, great addition to wikipedia, your entry provides useful information about the filmmaker and remains objective in writing style. Cinemazing (talk) 01:33, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

Peer Review
Great entry! I just copyedited a few minor grammatical things that stood out to me. I would suggest putting the personal life entry closer to the top, as most Wikipedia entries I have read use this format. As for the information on Sixel's involvement with statement made by the Australian Centre for Policy Development, I found the placement a bit clunky. It does fit in the "Personal life" section, but perhaps the introduction of this information could be a little smoother and more related to the previous paragraph. You might also consider putting her filmography in table format as it is easier to read, but that is purely a personal decision. Otherwise, this is a very well-written and informative article that provides the reader with a good sense of who this woman is. - Vorkapich

That photo
This one is real bad it should be replaced 2601:188:CB7E:2F60:5404:2E69:FEF8:9C1C (talk) 07:33, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

?
Apparently she is ageless… 2003:ED:2735:8463:81BB:A00C:4CB5:B7A4 (talk) 12:58, 27 May 2024 (UTC)