User:BushraSh/sandbox

Article Evaluation of Drama


 * Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you?

Yes, everything is relevant to the article topic but I felt that there was unnecessary linkage to common words which is distracting.


 * Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added?

The sources on the page are fairly recent. The critique could be expanded from just the "text" of the book to the visuals as we discussed in class.


 * What else could be improved?

A section could be introduced that also looks at authentic and superficial depiction of diversity and portrayal of gender stereotypes in the novel


 * Is the article neutral? Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?

No, because the article seems to be biased in portraying this books as a progressive one and the backlash against it as a negative response.


 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?

Over-represented viewpoints would include calling this a progressive book. Although, it is a great read, I felt that much of the topics such as diversity both ethnic and sexual were touched on very superficially. The characters were supposed to be diverse but they were drawn the same. Also, much of the gay love that was portrayed needed justifications of being in a play or going to a dance.


 * Check a few citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article?

Yes, they do work and do support the claims that are made 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?

I would say yes for the ones that I did check. A number of them were op-eds so the bias of the primary source is likely to creep into the article.


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?

Authors were trying to establish context to the motivations of the writer wanting to publish this. People want to balance out the "why" behind the controversy with the "why" of why Raina Telgemeirer wanted to say through this book and how it actually is more helpful than harmful.


 * 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?
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?

I think the way we did it in class was more complex because we treated the visual and text side of the novel equally given that is is meant to be a "graphic novel." Wikipedia mostly wanted to cover more ground but only in a superficial way. It really missed out on a key aspect of the novel.

 Indigenous People's Day: Stereotypes about indigenous peoples of North America 


 * Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you?

There are topics of relevance but some sections have links to other sub-topics right under the heading which makes it very tempting to click because you feel that in order to fully grasp the argument of this article, you must read the link provided first.


 * Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added?

The bibliography section has a source from 1998 which discusses alcohol use among the Native Americans. I think that recent studies could be added especially if there has been more scholarship on this problem. The source is 20 years old which means that it could be irrelevant to the kind of social structures and changes that have come about in these two decades. Similarly in the same section there is no recent scholarship on the origins of this stereotype. The section features another paper which is from 2005 about a study conducted in Alaska. The section also seemed to focus more on the problem of alcoholism itself rather than depicting and identifying where and how this is shown in popular media.


 * What else could be improved?

The sections are very concise for the amount of detail this topic demands. There is very little mention of the historical origins of this issue or the benefits that the other majority group might have by labelling Native Americans in a derogatory manner. The bit about Pocohantas could be improved especially because there is a Disney production that is supposed to depict this story. I think if we elaborated on that, it would be immensely help highlight how this plays out in popular culture.


 * Is the article neutral? Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?

I would say yes on the article being neutral.


 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?

There is a lot of under-representation in the article in general. Lots needs to be said about the historical context and so many sections needed to be expanded and restructured. I think Native American views in particular are missing because there is no case study or any interviews on what they feel on this. This is an on-going phenomenon and thus needs to be updated.


 * Check a few citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article

The links work and do support the claims that are made. However, the sources need to be updated and newer scholarships needs to be brought in for more discussion.


 * 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?

The page does not have a source for the groups of the groups of Indigenous People of the Americas. However, the sources that are newspapers and journals which are neutral.


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?  The conversations happening behind the scenes show that most people are not that informed about this issue. Some also think that because it is focused on a particular group. Comments like these highlight the dominant narrative of negligence and misinformation that exists around Indigenous People's issues especially in the US.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?

It's rated a B and is part of the WikiMedia Project.


 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?

It's a lot less nuanced and less descriptive. I think our class discussions have been more detail oriented in that we focused on the historical issue and also examined how it is shown in the present day.

 Tucson Unified School District: Wiki week 2 


 * Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you?

- Everything I looked at seemed relevant but I think the article needs some restructuring. I think that listing the controversy as the second section on the index is distracting because it builds curiosity and urgency around it. Since, the article is about the school district, it would make more sense discussing all the other features first such as the curriculum and then adding the section about the ethnic studies controversy. I just think it fits better that way.


 * Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added?

All sources are recent. There is nothing about the TUSD curriculum in the article. I have no idea on what the requirements are or what is offered.


 * What else could be improved?

I think the article could have a list of "features" that the school district has- it was very odd seeing how it ended on the "health initiative." The placement of that section was awkward as well because it came after the list of all the schools in the District. Furthermore, the


 * Is the article neutral? Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?

All the other sections were neutral except the controversy one which I found to be a bit "white-washed." The author did not talk about the idea that controversy by bringing in a racial lens. In other words, racial segregation of schools continues to exist in the US especially when it comes to low-income minority neighborhoods. The author seemed to be taking a stand on the school district's side in that they provided sources justifying the ban with a budget cut. However, they did not address the hypocrisy of white people crying out segregation on ethnic studies when so many minority schools struggle and continue to struggle around the country. Moreover, author wrote that interview with an employee of the school district made him seem "uneducated." However, based on the readings and documentary we watched for class, I would not be surprised to find him ignorant about the issue. The author should have noted the culture of generalization and resistance to critique that the school district displayed in their treatment of the case.


 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?

I think a minority viewpoint of the controversy is underrepresented and their is a thinly veiled support for the district's diversity curriculum. The author even seems to agree with the District's stance on cancelling the ethnic studies program as they think that it can be "speculated" from their budget cuts.


 * Check a few citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article?

I checked citation (50) for the "Greening Group" in the school. It was last updated in 2016 which could indicate that the program no longer works. There should be a follow up on that. The links I clicked worked.


 * 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?

There is no citation for the statistics on enrollment in the introduction section. I do not know where it comes from. There were biased sources that took the side of the school district and the bias was not noted.


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?

There are conversations about editing links and people asking for feedback, nothing really relevant to the topic. Although there was a person saying that the controversy should not be included in this page since that's "different."


 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?

It's an "S" and is a part of the WikiMedia project.


 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?

It doesn't have a good structure and doesn't give proper context to the controversy which is what we talked about a lot in class. It favors the district without noting its bias and fails to show compelling arguments on the student's side.

A Wrinkle in Time- Novel article

- The lead section did summarize the book but didn't do the same for the whole article

- The background section is labelled " production history," which creates confusion. However, the information discussed is very good and includes direct quotes from the author.

-There's no discussion of genre as s separate section. As such, the article doesn't discuss how L'Engle deviates from her style or doesn't.

- The summary is very long, 7 paragraphs. Minute details about the story line are included such as Charles Wallace eating bread at night.

- The analysis section is called " major themes". It only talked about the author's background and how that influenced the novel. There was only a discussion of two major themes when there is a lot of analysis that could be included based on treatment of gender roles in the book. A scholar's viewpoint was included which built upon the themes that the article had discussed previously.

- Publication history is up to date but it also mentions some awards that the book has won which I think should be its own separate section. This is because the point about awards is repeated in the "reception" section which adds no new information

- Reception section is good. It's concise and refers to quotes.

There is also a section on characters which can be improved. I don't think the categories are necessarily well organized. There's no need to put alien and the three tramps  in separate categories since both  the beings are supernatural. They could also just add these descriptions in the plot sections briefly.

The other' s section talked about places and adaptations of the novel. I think these could be brought in summary or in themes.

Here is a source that I found on Lau's website: Blackburn, William. "Madeleine L'Engle's A Wrinkle in Time: Seeking the Original Face." Children's Literature Review, edited by Jelena Krstovic, vol. 172, Gale, 2012. Literature Resource Center, http://link.galegroup.com/apps/doc/H1420107872/LitRC?u=wash43584&sid=LitRC&xid=2d528c07. Accessed 9 Oct. 2018. Originally published in Touchstones: Reflections on the Best in Children's Literature, edited by Perry Nodelman, vol. One, ChLA Publishers, 1985, pp. 123-131.

Wiki Article Evaluation: Persepolis

Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you

No, the background section of the article included information about reception of the book by critics. I don't think think this information should have gone into section 6 which is reception. Putting it in the wrong section goes against Wikipedia guidelines for the structure of "articles." I also think that the publication history section can just be merged into background. They discuss essentially the same things.The summary section cites numerous examples which are very specific to the book. It also goes into some analysis about the book which does not belong into summary. As per the handout, summaries have to be general.


 * Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added?

I think the article is vast enough for now and does not need further additions. The information seems to be up to date but some sections such as summary and character list are very lengthy. A lot of specific information that is written there can be taken out. To improve the page, I would suggest paraphrasing and keeping the article as general as possible.


 * What else could be improved?

The genre section talks about "visual literacy" and then proceeds to extract a quote from the book which adds nothing to the discussion in the section. This section did a good job on comparing Satrapi to other writers in the same field but did not comment on how Persepolis is different than her other books. This section also ends very abruptly with a quote, as previously mentioned, leaving the reader lost. Moreover, in the section summary, there are many lines that state facts and do not contain a source. So to increase credibility, more citations need to be added.


 * Is the article neutral? Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?

The article follows the dominant reception of Persepolis as being a groundbreaking piece of work in depicting Iranians. While this is true to some extent, it fails to consider the ways in which this submission to popular norms can compromise the identities of the very people she is trying to liberate. I also think that the article needs to mention the fact that Satrapi does not support the veil so depicting her as someone "secular" is rather biased because her treatment of headscarves in the novels.


 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?

I think the so called "Liberal Humanist" viewpoints are overrepresented. More sources could be added to elaborate on how the difference in Iranian women's ideas of feminism is different than the West and needs no justification.

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?

No, I found several sections in the summary section where historical facts did not have a reference. Most of the sources that are included in the novel are newspapers and journals. I think the newspapers are biased in overwhelmingly hailing Persepolis as an exceptional work while academics are more skeptical in their treatment of the novel and note the various ways in which the novel does not succeed in empowering women.


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?

People are confused whether or not this book can be classified as a graphic novel. This is something we struggled in class too especially considering the artistic choices and narration from Satrapi.


 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?

The article is rated a B and is a part of the WikiProjectIran.


 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?

It lacks an analysis section while most of our discussions in class were analytic. Moreover, we also considered the ways in which the book could be falling into the trap of empowerment through conformity. This is felt was missing from the article.

DRAFTS PERSEPOLIS EDITS

Genre: I will add this at the beginning of the section


 * Persepolis as an unconventional work

Due to the nature of artistic choices made in Persepolis by virtue of it being an illustrated memoir, readers have faced difficulty in categorizing it into a genre. Nima Naghibi and Andrew O'Malley, professors of English at Ryerson University illustrate this by stating how bookstores have had issues with shelving Persepolis under a single label. Scholars like Hillary Chute argues that Persepolis, like other similar books, should be called a “graphic narrative” instead of a “graphic novel” as such works “claim their own historicity- even as they work to destabilize standard narratives of history.” She explains that graphic narratives defy convention portraying complex narratives of trauma which require “a rethinking of the dominant tropes of unspeakability, invisibility, and inaudibility that have tended to characterize recent trauma theory-as well as a censorship-driven culture at large.” Chute states that the technique of uncovering the invisible is a “powerful feminist trope.” Chute contends that Persepolis highlights this ‘unseen’ by appearing to be visually simplistic so that it can draw attention to the intense political events happening in the story.

Note: my copy edits on sections that need to be concise will be shown as a "strikethrough font."

Lead section: I will add the following information to make it more concise:

Persepolis is an illustrated memoir by Marjane Satrapi inspired by her childhood of growing up in Iran. The story revolves around her experiences of the Islamic Revolution and her subsequent to Europe. Thus, this Wikipedia article will provide an overview of the work by discussing various literary elements and the overall reception of the book.

"Persepolis is a graphic autobiography by Marjane Satrapi that depicts her childhood up to her early adult years in Iran during and after the Islamic Revolution. The title is a reference to the ancient capital of the Persian Empire, Persepolis. Newsweek ranked the book #5 on its list of the ten best non-fiction books of the decade. Originally published in French, the graphic novel has been translated from French to English, Spanish, Catalan, Portuguese, Italian, Greek, Swedish, Georgian, and other languages, and has sold 1,500,000 copies worldwide.

French comics publisher L'Association published the original work in four volumes between 2000 and 2003. Pantheon Books(North America) and Jonathan Cape (United Kingdom) published the English translations in two volumes – one in 2003 and the other in 2004. Omnibus editions in French and English followed in 2007, coinciding with the theatrical release of the film adaptation.

Satrapi and comic artist Vincent Paronnaud co-directed the animated movie, also titled Persepolis. Although the film emulates Satrapi's visual style of high-contrast inking, a present-day frame story is rendered in color. In the United States, Persepolis was nominated for Best Animated Feature at the 2007 Academy Awards.

Final version of the paragraph with Stephanie's paragraph:

Due to the nature of artistic choices made in Persepolis by virtue of it being an illustrated memoir, readers have faced difficulty in placing it into a genre. The term "novel" most commonly refers to books that are fiction. Thus, there is some controversy surrounding how to classify the genre of Persepolis, being that it is non-fiction. Nima Naghibi and Andrew O'Malley, professors of English at Ryerson University illustrate this by stating how bookstores have had issues with shelving Persepolis under a single label. Furthermore, scholars like Hillary Chute argue that Persepolis, like other similar books, should be called a “graphic narrative” instead of a “graphic novel.” She argues that the stories these works contain are unique in themselves and challenge popular historical narratives. Professor Liorah Golomb from the University of Oklahoma states about Persepolis and related books; "As time went on the comics still tended towards the autobiographical, but storytelling gained importance. Most of the women creating comics today are still doing so from a woman's point‐of‐view, but their target audience seems more universal.

Chute explains that graphic narratives defy convention portraying complex narratives of trauma emphasize a different approach on discussing issues of  “unspeakability, invisibility, and inaudibility that have tended to characterize recent trauma theory-as well as a censorship-driven culture at large.” She adds that this technique of uncovering the invisible is an influential feminist symbol. Chute contends that Persepolis highlights this ‘unseen’ by appearing to be visually simplistic so that it can draw attention to the intense political events happening in the story.