Talk:Nia DaCosta

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 5 September 2019 and 4 December 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Southerngothics. Peer reviewers: Snapplerocks, Purpleoctopus.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 17:49, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Analyzing Cinema, Gender and Sexuality
— Assignment last updated by GreenBruchert8 (talk) 04:32, 17 December 2023 (UTC) Peer Review on Nia DaCosta by Alice Green

Lead: I find this article concise and factual as it provides insight into DaCosta’s development.

Content: The content provides a detailed description of where DaCosta began in the film industry and things unfolded leading her to become a successful director.

Tone and Balance: The information is delivered in a neutral voice that restrains itself from sounding like the author is promoting the director.

Sources and References: The author has thoroughly researched DaCosta’s development as a director using many reliable sources.

Organization: The article unfolds naturally from DaCosta’s beginnings and builds to her filmography.

Overall: I enjoyed reading this article as it provided the reader with an ability to see DaCosta as someone that came from Brooklyn and Harlem and acquired the education necessary to find herself as a movie crew member and climb to the heights she has achieved. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AliceFrancesca1998 (talk • contribs) 04:24, 18 December 2023 (UTC)

Peer Review by LAsnin
1)What does the article do well? Is there anything from your review that impressed you? Any turn of phrase that describes the subject in a clear way?

I think they do a good job of keeping the facts straight and not adding emotion. It was also good when they mentioned the subject's mentors. Gives good information.

2)What changes would you suggest the author apply to the article? Why would those changes be an improvement?

Overall I think the article was strong and pretty similar to a typical Wikipedia page. The only thing I would recommend is working on re-wording certain sentences. Some of the info. (grew up in Brooklyn and Harlem) can be reworded to sound different and still give the same information.

3)What's the most important thing the author could do to improve the article?

Again, the article is good however I would just double check to make sure everything is formatted the same way throughout the article.

4)Did you notice anything about the article you reviewed that could be applicable to your own article? Let them know!

Peer reviewing this definitely made me think about the way I write and how I can do a better job or solely summarizing and not adding emotion to the writing. GreenBruchert8 (talk) 05:30, 18 December 2023 (UTC)