User:Brockferlaak/sandbox

Article Evaluation: Midnight Rider (film)
For the most part, yes. The article gives what history it can on the film Midnight Rider, and then it goes into the whole Sarah Jones event, which is what the production is known for. The only thing that did distract me however was in the section about the accident, they mention that the bridge they were filming on was used in a historic battle. This piece of information really has nothing to do with the film or the accident, so it confuses me why it was included, and came off as distracting to me. Yes, the film gives quotes from members of the production of the film as well as the railroad company, and shows the complicated sides of the case. Then it talks about the investigation and the results of the case from a neutral and objective retelling of the facts. I think that the Safety for Sarah organization is underrepresented in this article. Because it was something birthed out of the accident, I think that the article should mention more rather than simply it came out of Sarah Jones's death. I'd like to know who started it, when, and what they do. This information should be not hard to find. Yes, the links work and they seem to be consistent with the article. The articles come from a bunch of different film news magazines including Variety, Hollywood Reporter, and Deadline Hollywood. As well as other news sites such as Daily News, LA Times, and Savannah Business Journal. Other various press releases are cited as well. As of a few days ago the CSX train company has been trying to reopen this case. This information could be added based on the results of their attempt. Some people claim that the article should be headed about Sarah, not Midnight Rider. But others say to that is that the Sarah story is the story of Midnight Rider, they only shot one scene of the movie, and it is the production that was responsible for this incident, and thus this production and the people involved are always going to be tied to this story. The article was a part of WikiProject United States as well as WikiProject Film. It is rated Start Class and has been supported by the American Cinema Task Force. It gave a lot of specific facts about both the film and the incident as well as the aftermath. The situation was looked at as a whole and all sides were mentioned and their opinions/statements accounted for.
 * Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you?
 * Is the article neutral? Are there any claims, or frames, that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * Check a few citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article?
 * Is each fact referenced with an appropriate, reliable reference? Where does the information come from? Are these neutral sources? If biased, is that bias noted?
 * Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added?
 * Check out the Talk page of the article. What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?

My Edit:
On the talk page I wrote this:

I have noticed that another detail that distracts the reader from the flow of the page is that detail about the railroad being the location of the "Battle of Altamaha Bridge". I suggest that this be omitted unless it bears some sort of significance to the film or the shoot. If the production coordinators used the bridge for that reason then I believe that the statements about that should be quoted in the paragraph.