User:Massmediazealot/sandbox

Wikipedia practice (Week 3)
Hellooo this is Massmediazealot 🔥 ! I hail from Atlanta, GA but I rep Houston, TX (yes, I share a hometown with Beyoncé!) !! I am taking a class called "Women Filmmakers" at Emory University this semester, and my teacher is the brilliant and legendary film scholar Michele Schreiber 🙂😁🙂 This week I will be practicing Wiki-writing for our semester-long filmmaker project 💻✏️

practice link to practice

practice link to dogs

practice bolded

practice italicized


 * one-colon indention


 * two-colon indention


 * three-colon indention


 * bulletpoint

Signature: Massmediazealot (talk) 00:50, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

Ah ok cool. I'm definitely a Wiki pro now. Let's roll 😎

Article evaluation (Week 4)
I evaluated queer filmmaker Kimberly Peirce's Wikipedia page.

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


 * Yes, everything is relevant and nothing is distracting, but the article could use some curb appeal. I'm thinking a photo would be nice, and more organization in the "Career" section.

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


 * Yes, everything is neutral. No suspicious adjectives or anything.

3. Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?


 * Hmmm, no I don't think so.

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


 * I checked the first 12 citations/links. The #2 link to her high school does not say that she attended or graduated from there, so the link is no good. Whoever wrote the line with the #7 citation is ignorant, because the article says Peirce was working on a "thesis script about a female Civil War spy posing as a man," not about a "female soldier in drag during the American Civil War." I had to shake my head at that one. Lastly, the #8, #11, and #12 links produce nothing.

5. 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 links that do work are from legit, neutral sources about art, cinema, the industry, etc.

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 Is any information out of date?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


 * Yes, the last four lines in her "Career" section are random and need to be updated to reflect the current status of the projects described. Or, the dates need to be better-defined and/or the language needs to be altered to reduce the feeling of foreshadowing in them.

7. 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?


 * There are no conversations going on. Just three automated "External links modified" posts from Wikipedia bots.

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


 * It is rated "Start-class" and yes it is apart of 4 WikiProjects—WikiProject Biography of Actors and Filmmakers, WikiProject Pennsylvania, WikiProject LGBT studies, and WikiProject Chicago.

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


 * Unfortunately we never talked about Kimberly Peirce in class.

Article addition (Week 5)
I added to the 2001 film La Ciénaga Wikipedia article information about its casting and the Sundance Institute/NHK award it won in 1999. I cited the two sources that we read from in class—Deborah Martin's chapter and Luciano Monteagudo's interview—which are listed in my bibliography below.

Preliminary research (Week 6)
Lucrecia Martel's amazinggg film La Ciénaga (2001) made me cry uncontrollably for 15 minutes, so I am choosing her for my woman filmmaker project this semester. Dr. Schreiber said to our class on April 2 that Martel's Wikipedia page is "pitiful," and I agree! But luckily I am here to save the day 😀😀😀

So, instead of finding 3 sources for 3 filmmakers, I found 9 sources for 1 filmmaker, Lucrecia Martel:


 * Bahiana, Ana Maria. "Female Filmmakers in Latin America: Unsung Pioneers, Fierce Explorers." Celluloid Ceiling: Women Directors Breaking Through. Ed. Gabrielle Kelly and Cheryl Robson. London: Supernova, 2014. 77-91. Print.
 * Gutiérrez-Albilla, Julián Daniel. "Filming in the Feminine: Subjective Realism, Social Disintegration and Bodily Affection in Lucrecia Martel's La Ciénaga (2001)." Hispanic and Lusophone Women Filmmakers: Theory, Practice and Difference. Ed. Parvati Nair and Julián Daniel Gutiérrez-Albilla. U.K.: Manchester UP, 2015. 215-28. Print.
 * Martin, Deborah, and Deborah Shaw. Introduction. Latin American Women Filmmakers: Production, Politics, Poetics. Ed. Deborah Martin and Deborah Shaw. London ; New York: I.B. Tauris, 2017. 11-23. Print.
 * Martin, Deborah. "La Ciénaga: Distanciation and Embodiment." The Cinema of Lucrecia Martel. U.K.: Manchester UP, 2016. 30-53. Print.
 * Martin, Deborah. "Planeta Ciénaga: Lucrecia Martel and Contemporary Argentine Women's Filmmaking." Latin American Women Filmmakers: Production, Politics, Poetics. Ed. Deborah Martin and Deborah Shaw. London ; New York: I.B. Tauris, 2017. 241-62. Print.
 * Monteagudo, Luciano. "Lucrecia Martel: Whispers at Siesta Time." New Argentine Cinema: Themes, Auteurs and Trends of Innovation. Ed. Horacio Bernades, Diego Lerer, and Sergio Wolf. Buenos Aires: Ediciones Tatanka, 2002. 69-78. Print.
 * Schroeder Rodríguez, Paul A. "The Rise of the Woman Director: Lucrecia Martel's Salta Trilogy (2001-8)." Latin American Cinema: A Comparative History. Oakland, CA: UC Press, 2016. 266-81. Print.
 * Shaw, Deborah. "Intimacy and Distance - Domestic Servants in Latin American Women's Cinema: La mujer sin cabeza and El niño pez/The Fish Child." Latin American Women Filmmakers: Production, Politics, Poetics. Ed. Deborah Martin and Deborah Shaw. London ; New York: I.B. Tauris, 2017. 123-48. Print.
 * Smith, Paul Julian. "Transnational Co-productions and Female Filmmakers: The Cases of Lucrecia Martel and Isabel Coixet." Hispanic and Lusophone Women Filmmakers: Theory, Practice and Difference. Ed. Parvati Nair and Julián Daniel Gutiérrez-Albilla. U.K.: Manchester UP, 2015. 12-24. Print.

My plan to edit Lucrecia Martel's Wikipedia page (Week 7)
Her existing page is very scarce, so I can add a lot. My current plan is to add information about her early life, her filmmaking career, her personal life (which has proven to be difficult to find), her filmography, and her awards and honors. I may also add information about her filmmaking style/technique/aesthetic, her areas/themes of interest (family, childhood, gender, sexuality, nationality, race, class, history, and colonialism), and her legacy and impact.

Article draft (Week 8)
See plan above.

For Hans on Talk:Lotte Reiniger
Hii Hans! I'm reviewing your article. Here are some suggestions I have after reading it:


 * 1. Take out "from 1926" in the lead and replace it with "(1926)"


 * 2. Change "Reiniger is also noted for having devised a predecessor to the first multiplane camera; she made more than 40 films, all using her invention." in the lead to "Reiniger devised a predecessor to the first multiplane camera and used it to make all 40-50 of her films."


 * 3. Split the "Biography" section into "Early life" and "Career" and "Death." Under the "Career" section you can have subheadings like "Early films" and "Later films" or "1918-1930" and "1931-1980," since the 30s seem to be her period of stagnation because of the Nazi stuff.


 * 4. Try to incorporate the small "Art style" section into her "Career" section, since it's really not that much.


 * 5. Combine the "Legacy" and "Influence" sections, since they're kind of the same thing.


 * 6. Is the "Bibliography" section necessary? If any of those books are cited within the article they should just be included in the "References" section. I think "Further reading" sections are only for when there are full-length books out on the topic, not just chapters.

So - content-wise, everything is pretty good. I would just organize and condense the article a bit more :)

For Carmen on Talk:Dee Rees
Hii Carmen! I'm reviewing your article. Here are some suggestions I have after reading it:


 * 1. See if you can find some more about her early life and background, because right now you only have one short sentence.


 * 2. Talk a little bit more about how she converted Pariah from a short film into a feature film.


 * 3. Organize the "Career" section a bit more. Maybe since she only has three feature films, make them subheadings? It just seems a bit jumbled.


 * 4. Consider merging some of the sentences where you're talking about what the films are about. Also, the awards and superlatives seem a little much, especially the Mary J. Blige thing.


 * 5. In the last three lines of the "Career" section, instead of using language like "recently signed," "was given the chance," "now," "upcoming," and "will," write the actual dates, because soon it will get outdated.


 * 6. The things written about Pariah and Mudbound in the "Personal life" section can be omitted or integrated into what is already written about those films in the "Career" section.


 * 7. In the "Filmography" section, put "Shorts" before "Features" because it is more chronological that way.

Overall, things are pretty good. It could just use a little bit of cleaning up (content-wise) and organizing :)

Peer review response (Week 12)

 * N/A

Moving my work to Wikipedia (Week 13)
Done!