User:SICUwinki/sandbox feedback

Article Draft Feedback
Major revisions needed. Chronophoto (talk) 01:03, 20 February 2018 (UTC) (course instructor)
 * The existing Wikipedia page on Ginny Stikeman is already pretty extensive. Much of the information in this draft seems to repeat information that is already on that page. You need to either come up with 500 words of prose that are clearly different from what already exists on Wikipedia or else choose a different filmmaker.

peer reviewing
The article shows Ginny influence in feminist filmmaking. Briefly, it presents her as an influence in the movement within Cinema industry and her importance for Studio D. The written is neutral, does not give more attention to one subject over others and does not seem to evaluate her work. It adds new information to an already existing article. It seems to have strong references and sources. A way to improve the article would be cite more sources within the paragraphs. That way, the person who is reading can check the information. Also, I would suggest creating a table for her awards and nominations, as it is done with her filmography – which is an idea I will add to my article as well! It makes it more visually pleasing. It may be a good idea to add her involvement in Blue Metropolis Festival in that table too. For the text, I would suggest including influential or important movies she edited – or at least some examples and name of directors she partnered with, if the information is available. I believe that it represents her position in the industry. Finally, I would review the “Legacy” topic and try to make it less redundant with the rest of the article. What about citing someone who wrote about her in History of Cinema in Canada? AzaAyla (talk) 10:49, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

Ofloofla's Peer Review
Your article has a clear structure, and you have really good sources. You use a good neutral point of view, however in the sentence, "Ginny later received many awards for this film that overlooked societal norms within filmmaking", it could perhaps be more of an analysis rather than an unbiased/neutral fact? Another suggestion that I would make for your article is to maybe place your citations more throughout the text? Also, in your beginning paragraph you go back and forth from using the name Ginny to using Stikeman, maybe it would be a good idea to follow through on just one name throughout the text? Perhaps the surname?

Ofloofla (talk) 18:13, 26 February 2018 (UTC)