User:Annietranspo/sandbox

Evaluating an Article: Artistic Gymnastics

The first thing I noticed when reading the article about artistic gymnastics is that, while it is very detailed in all aspects of gymnastics, it is organized in a way at that make is somewhat confusing. There are facts in certain sections that would be better suited in other sections, and there are some entire sections that should be placed before or after others.

When the article states in the very beginning that "Artistic gymnastics is a discipline of gymnastics in which athletes perform short routines (ranging from about 30 to 90 seconds) on different apparatuses, with less time for vaulting." it is true that this is factually correct. While this is correct, I believe is should be placed somewhere else, possibly in the section that goes through the different apparatuses. As well as this, if they specify that vault is the shortest event, they should also discuss that bars is generally 45 seconds, while beam and floor routines last 90 seconds. To only specify vault makes it seem as though floor, beam, and bars can all be between 30-90 seconds, which is not the case.

Having WAG under history, followed by the apparatuses, men's and women's, can make it confusing for reader's; jumping around from women's gymnastics, to men's, and back. I believe that if men's gymnastics and women's gymnastics were broken up separately and the apparatuses were broken up within those sections, it would be much easier to read.

All in all, the sources used in this article are effective, and they have a decent amount of information. It would be helpful to add information about the most famous gymnasts of all time, as well as maybe some information about college gymnastics, and the process of training for those young gymnasts. I believe that with careful editing and rearranging, this article could easily move up from a C-Class to an A-Class.

Outline for out Personal Project:

One popular focus for scholars of Shakespeare’s Cymbeline is that of marriage referenced in regards to heterosexuality; focusing on the role of desire within history, a complicated love plot, and the desire for normative categories. Critics such as Valarie Wayne and Tracy Miller-Tomlinson have paralleled the characters of “Fidele–Innogen and Posthumus, Cymbeline and Augustus” in that they have become the central focus in the aspects of  “social significance in Cymbeline” within “heterosexual marriage” and it’s “relations that read simultaneously as homosocial, homoerotic, and hermaphroditic” [1]. Critics have often pointed out the lack of women figures in this Shakespeare play, noting that the play “is figured in the masculine embrace that becomes the dominant trope of these final scenes” [1]. Even Imogen, the only prominent female role in the play, cross-dresses as a male in this play. This emphasis of male dominance is often dommineered as critics as a take on the misogynist view of the time period.

Critics have also pointed out that Fidele — Imogen’s male identity — is used as her shield in the play. Critics have cited that Imogen uses Fidele as her shield and weapon, and that her power over male lineage and power is only possible when she is dressed as a male [2]. [1] Tracey Miller-Tomlinson, Queer History in Cymbeline, Shakespeare 12 no.3 (2016) 225-40)

[2] Ann Thompson, ‘Person and Office: the Case of Imogen, Princess of Britain’, in Vincent Newey and Ann Thompson(eds), Literature and Nationalism (Liverpool, 2001), 76-87.

I plan to add more to this passage, more specifically the second paragraph, and I intend to ensure my citations are done correctly. I will be editing Sam's section of the wiki page, and Emma will be editing mine. Sam's paragraphs will likely go first because she has more traditional criticisms about gender, and Emma's will go last because queer theory is the most recent train of thought. It makes sense for me to go second, as I will be touching both on traditional misogynist views as well as more current views like that of incest and distraction of gender norms.