User:Weiliu777/Summer Palace (2006 film)/Zyixuann Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

(provide username)

Weiliu777/Summer Palace (2006 film)


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Weiliu777/Summer_Palace_%282006_film%29?veaction=edit&preload=Template%3ADashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)

Evaluate the drafted changes
(Compose a detailed peer review here, considering each of the key aspects listed above if it is relevant. Consider the guiding questions, and check out the examples of what feedback looks like.)

Lead

The author includes a subheading of the lead but does not change or update the content.

Content

The content added is closely relevant to the topic and is up-to-date. It does not include content that does not belong. All contents are closely relevant to the topic. The subheadings or section titles are the perspectives that the author is going to use to analyze the film. The article addresses one of Wikipedia’s equity gaps because it revolves around the sex life of some young university students in China. This content could effectively expand the public’s knowledge about the life of this group, which has been underrepresented. Besides, its focus on their sex life further enables the public to explore this private aspect of their lives and better understand their experiences affected by a social movement.

Tone and balance

The content added is not very neutral. The author uses direct quotes, such as “masterfully converges sexual awakening…”, which reflects the position taken by the author of the original source rather than the author’s own neutral, objective understanding. Besides, some statements such as “the correlation between student movement in Tiananmen Square and their sex life is clear” are subjective and biased. This statement about the clear correlation reflects the position of some people who have knowledge about these topics and their own attitudes. Therefore, I think some improvements could be made to make the content more neutral.

Sources and references

The new content added is backed up by a reliable secondary source published in a journal titled The Journal of Cinema and Media Studies. After finding and reading this source, I found that the added content accurately reflects what this source says. The source is also very current, published in 2021. The great currency of this source improves its credibility. However, the source is written by an author rather than a diverse spectrum of authors. This is a limitation because it reduces the diversity of the perspectives in the content added and makes the readers unable to look at the film from diverse perspectives.

Organization

The content added is concise, clear, and easy to read. There are no grammar or spelling errors. The overall structure is good, with clear, specific titles and subtitles.

Images and media

This draft does not include images that could enhance the understanding of the topic. I think images about the film and some characters could be included.

(Yixuan Zhang)