User:Ellenka95/sandbox

Article Evaluation:

Film producer


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

In the article Film Producer everything seem pretty relevant to the article topic. Although I think that article in some sections need more explanation.

Also content is organized into groups of related material, including a lead section and all the sections that can reasonably be included in an article of its kind. However, at least one more section will be useful to add. Also one more thing that distracted me is that article itself is pretty small, and does not have all the information. It means if I were to make a project about film producer, I would not use the wikipedia article since it is lack of information. But for quick reference of the film producer is okay.


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

The Film Producer article looks neutral and don't seem to have any claim or frames toward a particular position. The prose contains no major grammatical errors and flows sensibly. The Manual style does not need to be followed rigorously.


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

Yes all the links work properly. It has reliable source and any important or controversial material which is likely to be challenged is cited.


 * 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?

Yes. In this article each fact referenced with an appropriate, reliable reference. The information come from variety of books, journals and appropriate cites. Everything is being cited firmly. The sources are also neutral and does not have an opinion. No biases founded. However, I noticed that single sources have been used too many time (like 42 times for example) which is not appropriate.


 * Is any information out of date?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

The information about salary of film producer needs to be updated, since it is based from 2014 year.

Also, there are missing some of the types of producers such as, co-executive producer, consulting producer, edit producer and post producer. Since they have been arranged in order, by adding types to the list, we would need to rearrange it again.

Moreover, in the Carrier Process section of the Film Producer article it would be helpful and knowledgeable to know how some of the famous film producers broke into the business: in short, how was their path, did they arise already having "a million" or did they make it having a penny in the pocket.


 * 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?

In the Talk page of the article things like weather to add illustration and (or) diagrams are being discussed. I think that in the parts where it is relevant and useful to content the diagrams may be added.


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

The article is rated low importance. I think that this is due to the fact that the article has not been fully explored and needs improvement.


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

The Wikipedia article has more information obviously since our class is only 3 hours length and we do not have much time to discuss every single thing. However, most important things are being covered in class. Also in the class we present different opinions whereas the Wikipedia article is neutral.