User:Lilyzzf/sandbox

''' Note: If you want to check my progress on editing and adding onto the articles I have selected to work on, please check my other sandboxes (on article one, two, and three, respectively). '''

Content
This page is a C-class page, which makes sense because most of its contents are not well-developed. We can see that each category only has a few lines and are usually general descriptions without any details. Therefore, I think there certainly are missing information to be added to complete the page. The big categories are also quite disordered: some different ways of categorization are listed first, followed by criticism, etc. and then followed further by some other ways of categorization. I believe this page can be improved if the categories are reordered and condensed and contents substantiated. Also, Internet censorship is included as a subcategory in the "By Media" section, although it recognizes that there is a separate main article for Internet censorship on Wikipedia. I don't know if it's common practice on Wikipedia, but I think this section can be shortened as there is already a more complete page for it.

Tone
I think the tone is fairly neutral -- there aren't obvious places where the author is biased towards one side of the debate, or deliberately overlooks one side. Thus, I don't see an overrepresentation or underrepresentation of certain viewpoints.

Talk page
The article is rated as a C-Class article, so it is not that bad but definitely has a huge room for improvement. Additionally, it's also a level-4 vital article, meaning that it's important to the society. It is a part of many different WikiProjects, such as WikiProject Freedom of Speech. The most recent discussions center around controversies over censorship's definition and image, which further indicates that this article is in its early stage.

Content
This is a Start class page, meaning that this article is in its very early stage of development and can be much developed. This article is extremely short, as there are only three main sections, each of only one paragraph long. The content is definitely relevant to this page, but is quite disorganized. It focuses on the actions of the state in surveilling Chinese Internet and media, but the information could be reorganized in a different, clearer way. Some information can be combined into something like "State Actions" and other perspectives (such as from the people, local law enforcement) can be incorporated. Also, I think the discussion of frontier regions can be separated as they are somewhat different (and more complicated) cases.

Tone
Judging from the existing information, the tone is fairly neutral. In fact, the article presents a lot of official data and timeline of state surveillance in China, citing from authorities. No perspective is being emphasized or underrepresented.

Talk page
As I mentioned above, this is a Start class page and thus has a huge room for improvement. This article is also a part of WikiProject China, which shows its importance on a broader scale. The last edit of the page comes of January 2018, when a Wikipedian modified the external links. Therefore, it seems like fellow Wikipedians are trying to develop the page by adding more information. I think that this page can first of all be organized and then substantiated. Of course, with more information at hand, we can be more sure of what categories there should be as well. This is always a mutually supporting cycle.

Potential Sources Collection
1. "Leave no Dark Corner," ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

2. "In Your Face: China's All-Seeing State"

3. People's Pornography: Sex and Surveillance on the Chinese Internet http://web.a.ebscohost.com.proxy.uchicago.edu/ehost/ebookviewer/ebook?sid=e1783c7d-fd62-4bb8-b6a3-3b85ddc087bc%40sdc-v-sessmgr05&vid=0&format=EB

4. https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/media-censorship-china

Content
This is a Start class page, meaning that this article is in its very early stage of development. It is a bit longer than the previous article, but still somewhat disorganized. In fact, the entire article is listing different examples of corporate censorship, and thus should be organized by its categories. However, there is one section named "Examples" and a random one-line section named "Behaviour," while only the last few sections are appropriately organized. I think that once again, the article needs to be categorized in a better way and then substantiated with more examples. Some general theoretical descriptions are also good things to add to this article.

Tone
Judging from the existing information, the tone is fairly neutral. In fact, the article is mainly reporting the historical cases of corporate censorship by quoting information from various authorities. It seems like the editors are just trying to report information and not instill any existing viewpoints. There is not an obvious overrepresentation or underrepresentation of different perspectives to the debate.

Talk page
As mentioned above, this is a Start-class article. Also, it is a part of many WikiProjects, such as Business, Internet, and culture. Many Wikipedians are spotting similar issues on the talk page. Some people are arguing that there are noticeable omissions in the page, while others question the page's neutrality and factual accuracy. I think what needs to be done is: first, organizing the page and removing biased material; second, substantiating the page with more notable examples from reliable sources; third, suggesting further directions of research on the talk page.

Potential Sources Collection
1. "Russian Censor Gets Help From Amazon and Google"

2. Amazon.com controversies: This Wikipedia article might also provide some valuable information, either in the article itself or in the citations section.

3. https://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2013/08/19/can-free-speech-and-internet-filters-co-exist/corporate-censorsip-is-untouched-by-the-first-amendment

Content
This is a Stub class page, meaning that this article is not only in its early stage of development, but also has many issues. It doesn't, as it is now, conform to the standards of Wikipedia. Actually, at the top of the page there are some warnings about this page. For example, the tone is not appropriate for Wikipedia; the citations are not sufficient; the quality is too low that the article might need to be rewritten completely. I think the content in this page is definitely relevant to the topic and is very well organized. I would substantiate the content more by adding information to the eight-legged essay's form, content and history. I think a discussion on both the historical and modern reception of the subject will also be a good idea.

Relevance of topic: This topic is relevant to the theme of censorship for this class, because the eight-legged essay is essentially a form of censorship on people's minds. Exam takers in China were forcibly limited in their imagination and expression of viewpoints, and had to conform to this fixed standard and talk about certain things.

Tone
Just as the page's warning says, I think the tone is a bit biased in this article. The previous writers seem to lean towards assigning a negative connotation to the eight-legged essay. Granted, it has many detrimental effects on the Chinese society in ancient times, but the article should remain factual and not opinionated. So, I would work on rephrasing some sentences and adding more information to the page to neutralize the tone.

Talk page
As mentioned above, this is a Stub-class article. It is of Mid-level importance. It is also part of the WikiProject Chinese History. So, this page is worth editing for sure. On the talk page, people are raising questions, such as if the essay is still used in China today, whether there are some similar examples in English, etc. It seems like people are still exploring this subject, which is in need of development. Therefore, I would continue with the suggestions I stated above.

Potential Sources Collection
1. Eight-Legged Essay

2. Chen Shouyi. (1961). Chinese literature: A historical introduction. New York: Ronald Press.

3. baguwen on Britannica

4. The Chinese Examination Essay: Some Literary Considerations

Content
This is a Start class page, meaning that this article is also in its very early stage of development and has room for improvement. This article is much better organized than the previous ones, perhaps as a result of the nature of this topic. The article first gives a rating system used to determine which films could be certified. Then, there is a by-country breakdown of film censorship, each developed in its own thread and link to a separate, more detailed article. I think the main way this article can be organized is by adding a definition and a good introduction as the lead for this article. Then, each section in the "By Country" classification should be substantiated further. Of course, this is a lot of work, so perhaps one editor can focus on one specific country. Maybe one can first work in that country's specific article, and then distill the most important information to include here.

Tone
I think the tone of most parts is neutral. However, in some places the language might lead one to think it is a bit biased. For example, I would refrain from saying something like the film censorship in one country is considered the "most restrictive," unless it is published by a professional rating agency. One should not reach his or her own conclusions based on other information -- this might indicate personal bias.

Talk page
This is a Start-class page, as mentioned. It is also a part of WikiProject Freedom of Speech and WikiProject Film. The only and most recent edit noted on the Talk page is from September 2017, where one Wikipedian modified the external links. It seems like this page is not receiving quite a lot of attention, and the editors (as I noted above) are not being very responsible in writing and citing sources. This article is already very organized, so what it needs now is correction and then substantiation.

Potential Sources Collection
Since this article is international in scale, I would focus on adding information to some specific regions (mostly China and other Asia countries). Although they have their own pages, I think this article would benefit from having more precise but also broader information about each country.

1. An interview with Lou Ye, who made the movie Summer Palace, which has important information about what famous Chinese films are censored and categorizes the reasons for their being censored.

2. "Summer Palace and Chinese Censorship" with Lou Ye and other producers of this banned film.