User:Dallasnguyen/sandbox

Peer Review 1.
This edit gives us some basic grammar choices, like changing sentence structure for a couple of sentences. I think they did a good job of giving us ways to consolidate the article. For example, ""white actors through blackface, brownface, and yellow face in a derogatory, intellectually lessen manner" - word choice: intellectually demeaning manner?," which I prefer their word choice here. I also agree with the other grammatical choices of adding a comma and standardizing our formatting of words like "white" and "black." Consistency is important.

The only question raised in the article was about Minstrel shows, which I agree is a very confusing sentence. Instead we should reword it to describe Minstrel shows, then move to describe why this promoted ethnically white behavior and harmed the view of other ethnicities.

Henry's Review
The first bullet point is a review of one of the cited sources, and it points out that the source is not academic. This is really important to note, as we will have to remove the section in the article pertaining to that source unless we find an academic source to back it up. The second bullet point asks us if we think it could be worth it to add something like a progress section. I actually think that this is a really good idea because then we can almost document the growing and changing efforts. That will make it easier to update the article in the future. Plus it will consolidate a lot of the information in the article so that when the readers get to the end they have a bit of a summary about where Inequality in Hollywood is at today. The final bullet point mentions the goals of including social movements around inequality in Hollywood, and I agree that the goal of adding those points is to talk about them as ongoing efforts. It might be a good idea if we make the new section to put these movements within this section. Or at least speak on where the movements are at now in the new section.

Hannah's Review
These edits were all about consolidation and I think Hannah pointed out some really great ways to make the voice of the article more direct and active. She definitely condensed some of our more wordy sentences. This is really helpful and I think it's a really good idea to reread the article specifically looking for ways that we can consolidate further. The more concise the article can be the better. Overall, she gives us a really good structure and suggestions to improve our paragraphs.

Siddharth Kumaran's Review

 * Great job on adding new sections
 * All the sections are well written and to the point
 * All the sections are well written and to the point
 * You guys maintain un-biased neutrality in all section, so good job!
 * Every section has the right amount of information
 * All your edits to the pre-existing changes are substantial and meaningful
 * You guys have a good variety of sources
 * Overall, I feel like you guys put in a lot of quality time into this assignment
 * I personally didn't see any grammar mistakes
 * Capitalize 'inequality' in the section title "History of Racial inequality in Hollywood"

Thank you for all the positive feedback, we'll be sure to properly capitalize the "I" in the section title "History of Racial inequality in Hollywood"

Samir's Review
We agree giving examples of prominent figures in the #Metoo movement like Kevin Spacey would be helpful and insightful so we'll try to add more examples. Also the line "made it onto the big screens of Hollywood" in the "History of Racial Inequality in Hollywood" section could be more formal so we'll try to stay away from informal language structure. In the future we'll consider the use of prominent figures as examples, especially in both the #Metoo and #OscarsSoWhite section. Thank you for pointing out the potential neutrality concerns with some of our sources, we'll be sure to sift through them to insure we don't pull any information from a biased source.

Isabel's Review
Thank you for your reassuring comments. We will be sure to correct the grammar mistakes in the #OscarsSoWhite section. You are correct Female, Male, and White do not have to be capitalized.

Peer Review: Birks Sachdev
1) I'm not sure what you mean by "intellectually lessen manner" under the section "History of Racial Inequality in Hollywood". Perhaps you could change this to "yellow face in a derogatory manner, in an effort to portray them as intellectually inferior". This would work better.


 * This seems like a definite improvement to our original wording. It tightens the wording and makes it less suspect to sounding like an analytical comment, especially because as this improvement takes place in the lead sentence of the section. Noted, and will change in our next draft.

2) Instead of presenting the changes in bullet points, try rewriting entire paragraphs from the article and improving the overall flow.


 * I agree. I initially organized the structure of our draft this way because there was a lot of moving parts. Having them in bullet points, I thought, might make it seem easier to see all of the changes as stand-alone, so readers could edit point by point. But, after looking through other peers’ articles, it definitely makes more sense to organize our draft like a regular Wikipedia article. The layout makes it easier to read and easier to make changes in the context of the how the article might actually look.

3) Would it be possible to add new information altogether about gender inequality from a historical context, to show how it has changed over time? Remember to retain a neutral tone!


 * Yes, it would! If you have any further suggestions besides a history of gender inequality in that section, our group would be open to more ideas. We’re also thinking of documenting non-acting roles and how gender disparity manifests there, such as the lack of female directors.

4) You could potentially add new subsections on Inequality in Hollywood with other ethnic groups, similar to how you wrote one on "Asian Inequality". This would provide valuable information to readers and you could use recent information which would be very relevant to the topic at hand.


 * Looking back at the original article, more ethic subsections under Racial Inequality would make a lot of sense. I’m thinking of the Latinx and North African and Middle Eastern/Arabic groups who experience similar but distinct sets of discrimination. We’ll research this more, and hopefully will be able to add these important subsections.

Cxndyoh Peer Review
Your draft is very well written, and I can't wait to see the final edits. You did very well in organizing potential edits and in keeping a neutral tone. Here are some potential edits:

Under History of Racial inequality in Hollywood:

I had some confusion in understanding what Minstrel shows were. It would be helpful to have a brief explanation of it.


 * I can see how no context preceding that sentence may leave readers confused with what Minstrel shows are. If we choose not to provide context for the sake of space (since the shows were a small part of the overall history), I think we’ll opt to hyperlink the word “Minstrel Shows” to its respective Wikipedia article. That way, if readers are unfamiliar with the term, they have an ease of access to find it.

"By the 1940’s and 1950’s, many ethnically white actors and actresses got into the spotlight by swapping out their culturally ethnic names for more widely accepted “white” names. Oppositely this left non-white actors out of work and cast aside.[6]"-- When you say ethnically white actors and actresses, I'm assuming you are referring to white people but I'm not sure what you mean by culturally ethnic names for more widely accepted "white" names.


 * I think our team meant perhaps Christian names. However, I agree that this is reaching into non-neutral territory. We will rewrite this part to address this issue while using more definite and less ambiguous terms.

You mentioned interracial marriage or relationship status as limiting factors to the people of color getting lead roles, but how did white actors/actresses play the role of initially the person of color with such appearance as blackface when it shouldn't have been portrayed in film in the first place? Clarifying this or using a different example might be better.


 * Clarification for this statement will be needed. Specifically, we will clarify the law in Hays code and read further on how blackface was exempted from that law.

Me Too
Would be good to put "twitter hashtag #MeToo" with the hash symbol. As notable names and figures were cited in this section, the team could redirect the names to their respective Wikipedia pages and specific sections in relation to the content, e.g. Alyssa Milano.


 * Good catches! Both types of changes will be reflected in the next draft as quality of life edits.

History of Racial Inequality in Hollywood
The part about where to this day, people of color are still fighting to get equal opportunities, was there used for this statement?


 * Looking back, I agree. This last statement should be omitted because it sounds biased. I think our team originally included because we did not know how to conclude that subsection.

#OscarsSoWhite
Is there a reason why "white" was written with a capital 'W'? What kind of 'major backlash' did the Oscars get? Who are some of the Hollywood celebrities of color who expressed their views? What did they say?


 * You pose an interesting question. We modeled the capitalization rules in the hashtag based on the original hashtag. In-text capitalization of White seems parallel to capitalizing Asian or Middle Eastern or Latin. However, we will look further into this issue to see what is the correct standardization.
 * We chose not to include too much information regarding the #OscarSoMovements because we linked this subsection to the main article of the 88th Oscars, where there is a more complete repository of the movement’s history. If we find a need to expand on this section specifically about more inequality metrics, we’ll definitely include them!

First Draft of Article (Improving Inequality in Hollywood)

 * Ghost In The Shell World Premiere Red Carpet - Scarlett Johansson (cropped).jpg

How we improved this article for our first draft:


 * We broke down our types of edits into two categories: New Sections and Improvements
 * In New Sections, we created new written content we deemed were relevant and notable to the article. For our first draft, we thought the three most important missing sections the article needed were sections on the #MeToo and #OscarsSoWhite movements and a general history of Racial Inequality in Hollywood given the storied existence of African American portrayal in American media. These were included in their appropriate sections (MeToo under Gender Inequality, and OscarsSoWhite and history under Racial Inequality).
 * In Improvements, we scoured the article for copyedit errors such as grammar, spelling, and punctuation and looked to change words to neutralize bias or awkward wording (since a main criticism Wikipedia gave the article was that it was written like a personal essay). We will paste every change we noticed as a chunk here. Finally, we wanted to add a media file to the article to visually represent what inequality looks like, so we included a picture of Scarlett Johansson at the premiere of "Ghost in the Shell" to highlight Asian American disparities in role opportunities under the mini-section Asian American Inequality.

Here are our changes, beginning with the New Sections:


 * #MeToo (Under Gender Inequality)
 * Main Article: Me Too Movement
 * In October 2017, the New York Times published an article about Harvey Weinstein, highlighting the sexual harassment accounts from many of the women actresses he worked with. Following the outbreak of this story, Alyssa Milano started the now viral twitter hashtag MeToo to encourage other sexual harassment victims to speak up. Several film, TV, and media production figures beyond Weinstein soon became involved in a number of latent sexual harassment accusations, including news anchor Matt Lauer, comedian Louis CK, and Disney producer John Lasseter.
 * Investigations into Weinstein’s and other high level executives’ harassment cases revealed that women actresses were threatened to perform sexual favors or be subjected to lewd, gender-based comments. Tight control over networks of power and uses of silence agreements discouraged women to speak up about their treatment. Since October 2018, the hashtag has been retweeted 19 million times and has accompanied notable company boycotts and accused figures to resign or step out of the public eye.
 * History of Racial inequality in Hollywood. (Under Racial Inequality after first subsection of that section)
 * The first films to come out of Hollywood that included non-white characters were played by white actors through blackface, brownface, and yellow face in a derogatory, intellectually lessen manner. Casting white actors to represent other ethnic characters is a practice that emerged during minstrel shows, primarily in America from the 1830’s-1840’s. The practices of Minstrel shows gained popularity when immigrants of Irish and Jewish descent promoted ethnically white behavior to increase their status to those of Anglo-Saxon origin while simultaneously negating the perception of Black, Native American, and Asian people. By the 1940’s and 1950’s, many ethnically white actors and actresses got into the spotlight by swapping out their culturally ethnic names for more widely accepted “white” names. Oppositely this left non-white actors out of work and cast aside.
 * Once people of color made it onto the big screens of Hollywood by the early twentieth century, they were only granted small background roles, or forced to stereotype their character to get the role. Through self-imposed restrictive laws like “the Motion Picture Production Code, Hays code” no interracial marriage or relationship like statutes could be portrayed on camera. This helped exclude actors of color from getting lead roles, even if their female counterpart was a character of color because it would typically be a white actress in blackface. To this day, actors and actresses of color continue fighting for equality in hopes of having equal opportunities to their white counterparts.
 * #OscarsSoWhite
 * Main article: 88th Academy Awards
 * The #OscarsSoWhite movement began as a push to make the Academy Awards more inclusive and racially diverse but has since sparked a critical reexamination for representation across the media industry, which includes TV, film, broadway, music, and news. After its creation in 2015 by activist April Reign following the announcement of the 88th Oscar nominations in which only one nominee out of the five directors and twenty actors nominated was not White, the Academy received major backlash from online communities and Hollywood celebrities of color. The hashtag has encouraged reconstruction in Academy membership, casting decisions, and behind-the-scenes staff diversity. In a research article, Caty Chattoo noted that before responding to the pushback against racial inequality, Academy membership was comprised of 92 percent White and 75 percent Male in 2016 . In 2017, this changed to include 41 percent people of color and 46 percent Female.

These are the changes we made to existing text in the article (changes in bold):


 * Intro
 * Inequality in Hollywood refers to the various forms of discrimination and social inequality in the American media industry such as gender inequality, racial inequality, and age inequality.
 * Gender Inequality
 * In the photo caption with Geena Davis, omit "The" Hollywood Actress.
 * Gender inequality in Hollywood and the media is a long-established issue. This is a list of how gender inequality is commonly manifested.
 * Add subsection title to Gender Inequality called Pay Gap to make distinct from other inequality issue.
 * The highest-paid actor, Mark Wahlberg, made $68 million, more than 2.5 times that of the highest-paid actress that year, Emma Stone, who ranked at 15th highest paid with $26 million.
 * Data from The Writers Guild of America, West, a union, (commas)
 * Although the two women were nominated for more Academy Awards than (omit 'all') the men put together, Lawrence was originally presented with five “points” while the leading actress, Adams, (comma) was presented with seven. The hack also brought forth data which showed that, (comma) “Of 6,000 employees..."
 * Add subsection title Representation and Opportunities to distinguish from Pay Gap.
 * Move "A 2017 study found that directors linked with the top 100 movies of that year were made up of 7.3% female compared to their male counters-parts at 92.7%. Across an 11 year study that included 1,100 top movies, only 4.3% of the directors were female." from Pay Gap section to this section
 * "Another study from FIA focusing on the opportunity of employment shows that 22 percent more men than women feel that they work regularly and have a large choice of employment opportunities." requires citation or we will omit.
 * The same study found that, (comma) "Visual..."
 * While men can be seen playing characters within a number of different genres
 * Despite being significantly represented in studio executive and producer ranks, women in the industry were intensely aware that other women on the stage had been vastly underpaid. (changed wording but would still need citation from prior text). Omit two sentences following this one.
 * Racial Inequality
 * The presence of racial inequality in Hollywood has also been discussed.
 * compared to 69 percent of roles  ' reserved ' for white actors.
 * This under-representation can also be seen in films which have been critically acclaimed. For example, the only non-white directed film to win an Academy award was 12 Years a Slave directed by Steve McQueen, winning best picture.
 * The Evolve Entertainment Fund[17] was created on January 2018 to provide a resource for people from under-served communities (omit 'the opportunity') to find work in the entertainment industry.
 * Omit "A recent 2018 study from IndieWire found that for actors of color, pay issues have an even steeper climb. At a time when Hollywood's bottom line is increasingly dominated by international box office, they face the myth that racially diverse films “don’t travel.”" - sounds like a personal essay in second line
 * Subsection on Asian Inequality
 * There have been many instances where white actors are used in place of Asian actors.[18] Omit: There have been many instances where people raised the question of why a white actor has been cast instead of an Asian actor. In the movie Doctor Strange, Tilda Swinton, a white woman, played the role of “the Ancient One, (comma)” a character that is presented as a Tibetan male mystic in the comics. Omit: (As well as the case of )Scarlett Johansson also received major backlash for playing the role of cyborg Motoko Kusanagi in the adaptation of the Japanese anime classic “Ghost in the Shell”.[18
 * Direct discrimination of Asian Americans is also present in notable movies and TV shows such as (omit 'the') “Kung Fu". (period, not comma) It recalled jarring memories of David Carradine from “Kung Fu,” the 1970s television series that, coincidentally, was itself a whitewashed version of a Bruce Lee concept”. There is still reportedly hidden instances where the erasure of Asians is an acceptable practice in Hollywood. Asians make up 5.7% of characters in Hollywood.[19]  Out of the top 100 films from 2015, 70 of the films had cast no female Asian actresses, and 49 of the films cast no Asian American actors at all.[20] In addition, Asian characters have (omit: ' on') 3%-4% of roles in scripted broadcast and cable shows in the 2014-15 season.[21]
 * (Omit: There have also been many) Notable celebrities (omit: 'that') have spoken upon this issue. Michelle Yeoh recalls that (omit: 'very specifically') someone said, ‘If we cast an African-American lead, there’s no way we can cast you because we can’t have two minorities’”.[22]  Famous action star Jackie Chan also stated in an interview with Steve Harvey, (comma) “For the last 20 years I’m looking for some other things, but in the U.S it’s difficult, always police from Hong Kong, police from China”. needs citation for Jackie Chan quote

Student Strike of 1970
Proposed changes/notes:


 * Neutralize lines of bias. For example, at the end of the introduction is a line, "For the most part, however, the protests were peaceful — if often tense. Students at New York University, for example, hung a banner out of a window which read "They Can't Kill Us All."" Tightening the language throughout the article to keep editorializing words out like peaceful or tense can have a big impact.
 * Photo journalism. Adding media to the article can strengthen the lived experiences of the protestors and universities involved. Because this was a relatively recent event, this media can be easy to find but also show contrast to modern student/youth protests.
 * Academic citations. There are lines in the article that require citation. For example, the last line in the article states, "In one instance, in New York City on May 8, construction workers attacked student protesters in what came to be called the Hard Hat Riot," with no citation. Revisiting scholarly articles, journals, and publications about how this student strike has affected the politics of current student movements or other retrospective historical insights can also lengthen the article and give more information to readers.

Sunrise Movement
Proposed changes/notes:


 * The article actually does really well at maintaining a neutral stance on the topic given its leftist origin.
 * More information can be injected surrounding the physical creation of the movement. Currently, there is only one line in the History sub-heading that briefly mentions the names of the organizers.
 * Adding more media, like for the Student Strike of 1970, can be a relevant piece of history for this article. Notably, the article mentions organizers occupying Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi's office. An image of this occupation can lend more neutrality, or at least more openness to interpretation, to the initial occupation setting.
 * Current events - there is a small subheading for what is happening regarding the movement in 2019, but not a lot of information has been released. It would be great to work on this section as the semester rolls on and we see how this movement takes off, considering its recent origins in November 2018.

Article Evaluation for Creative Commons

 * First thoughts on the introduction summary:
 * It was too long for what it was meant to summarize. It was split into both what Creative Commons was and its history and founders. I think a more effective split is to introduce the article with what the license is and have a separate "History" subsection.
 * Some irrelevant or trivial facts. It cites 1.4 billion licenses currently being used, but only Wikipedia and Flickr get special mention as two users of CC. If there were 1.4 billion licenses out there, several notable sites and entities would be using one.
 * The writing was more technical than necessary. An average user reading the introduction would be lost in the unnecessary jargon for a simple introduction. An example sentence is "They replace individual negotiations for specific rights between copyright owner (licensor) and licensee, which are necessary under an "all rights reserved" copyright management, with a "some rights reserved" management employing standardized licenses for re-use cases where no commercial compensation is sought by the copyright owner."
 * Overall notes:
 * Article is not perfectly neutral. The talk page admits this, with one user "[adding] some counter-criticism comments to help balance it and make it more neutral." Introduction has this uncited line: Their licenses have been embraced by many as a way for creators to take control of how they choose to share their copyrighted works. Who is the 'many' embracing CC?
 * Creative Commons Network subsection is awkwardly placed. I do not understand its particular relevance, but I appreciate the recent updates made to the section to reflect ongoing changes to the network (as of 2018).
 * This section was organized such that "South Korea" and "Bassel Khartabli" are both in the same section in succession. One is a country while the other is an individual. The original introduction to this section noted that only individual members are granted access to this network. It is unclear how this section was structured and how either entities are related.
 * Under the South Korea section, there are two bullet points kind of floating at the end of the section. No colon precedes the bullet points and no context is provided to show what those bullet points are referring to. Neither bullet point is linked to a separate wikipedia page or external link either; however, a cited source is inserted after each bullet point. If the intention was to reference the source they found information from for these two points of the section, it would have made more sense to hyperlink the phrases the first time they were mentioned or cite the sources within the paragraphs.
 * Grammar inconsistencies
 * This is a bit of a nitpick, but I noticed a number of grammar and punctuation discrepancies. For example, comma placements for dates were inconsistent. Some had commas only after the number and some did not have commas after the prepositional phrase. Prepositions or small words were often misused. The sentence, "From March 15, 2012 he was detained by" is an example with an awkward 'from' instead of 'on'.
 * Citations seem to be okay. I checked a few sources. Some of the ones I checked did not seem that credible, however. I think one link (https://wiki.creativecommons.org/wiki/CC_Affiliate_Network) sent me to another wikipedia page. There were a number of claims that definitely needed a citation. Without them, the article sounds biased (see first bullet of 'Overall Notes').
 * The Talk Page is concerning. The fourth section down the page shows a section titled 'This article is a mess'. Fortunately, this was signed February 2011, so improvements seemed to have been made. A more recent talk section highlights the bias against CC that was written into the article, with a similarly titled section 'This article is a mess (2015)': "I am dismayed at how prejudiced this article is against CC. It fails to mention, for example, that there is no way in the US to designate that materials are in the public domain and freely available for resuse." A reply to this section affirms this sentiment but the user says s/he does not want to volunteer to fix the bias.
 * This article is part of four different WikiProjects, all rated C-class.
 * We briefly mentioned Creative Commons in the last class, with a neutral, if positive, view on the benefits of sharing content across multiple users. This article briefly mentions this but does not go into detail of specific projects or experiences where CC has helped incubate this kind of crowdsourced idea.
 * A link to my evaluation on the talk page: Talk:Creative Commons

Me Too
Would be good to put "twitter hashtag #MeToo" with the hash symbol. As notable names and figures were cited in this section, the team could redirect the names to their respective Wikipedia pages and specific sections in relation to the content, e.g. Alyssa Milano.

History of Racial Inequality in Hollywood
The part about where to this day, people of color are still fighting to get equal opportunities, was there used for this statement?

#OscarsSoWhite
Is there a reason why "white" was written with a capital 'W'? What kind of 'major backlash' did the Oscars get? Who are some of the Hollywood celebrities of color who expressed their views? What did they say?