User talk:Isabelleshegog/sandbox

I like the sentence structure that you used to avoid showing and expressing your own opinion. The sources that you used to explain your topic of film genres is an important one that fits under stereotyping because female and male roles are portrayed in a stereotypical way in most movies and advertising. I would separate when you talk about specific male and female roles into a second paragraph. I think doing this would help the audience understand the difference between gender roles of males and females in different genres of movies. Fariha34 (talk) 02:59, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

You do a really really good job of remaining unbiased and fact driven. I think maybe you could use an example or two for the fact about how women like movies with female protagonists, which could help strengthen that statement. Also maybe using the word inevitably might be a little leading. Overall, I think you did a really good job including relevant information and remaining unbiased. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wohlina (talk • contribs) 15:34, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

I think that it would help your article if you added more examples or data. You say things factually, which is great, but you should give proof to your assertions.SocksOfDeath (talk) 15:57, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Good in general but it can be improve with more stat and evidence. You can check your 2nd source and see if you can fix the red error there. Maybe you can also add some hyperlinks to your work. ChristalCao (talk) 16:02, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Great work, but you can add more evidences or examples to support you idea.Koko413 (talk) 16:04, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

I think you are doing well in illustrating your information. You can describe some of examples not just saying that males like action movies, but it will be better if you show what movies in what period of time to detail that concept.Samuelzhao000005 (talk) 16:09, 3 April 2019 (UTC)Samuelzhao000005

I think you did a great job of presenting the information in a clear manner and with the facts you used. However, I would add more sources that include examples and maybe statistics to give a better picture on the issue. Lorenaramirezl (talk) 16:15, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

I would like to see more examples or specific data/statistics that would support your idea. --Jasonkung22 (talk) 16:35, 3 April 2019 (UTC)Jasonkung22

I liked the way you organized the paragraph. I think you're missing citations and more examples of these stereotypes. Also, you added the subsection which you're editing the original Wiki page, but you forgot to Hyperlink the page.Rafamatalon1234 (talk) 01:05, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

This is nice! Just to reiterate what other people have said, make sure you hyperlink the original Wikipedia page. Also, you could link some of your key words/phrases to relevant Wikipedia articles to provide more context to the reader. As well, for the second sentence-- who believes that "romantic movies and shows are more directed towards and intrigue more females than they do males?" Make sure to minimize passive voice. The sentence as well might also benefit from a comma after "towards," as the sentence is a bit bulky so difficult to understand. The sentence "one study that was conducted..." has a bit of troubles with tenses... You're referencing an article to explain something that happens currently, so you want to make sure that you allude that the stereotypes are still ongoing/being formed. (Ie: "[...] romance ARE genres that INTEREST females") You could also give a little bit more context as to what this study was, who conducted it, when, etc. Really great start to this though!! Isamouse79 (talk) 03:35, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

I really enjoyed this article on stereoptyping. I would just add some more examples and include evidence to back up Charlier118 (talk) 23:49, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

Good job! This looks great, but maybe add some more examples to support your discussion! Sydneycurrie5 (talk) 20:39, 7 April 2019 (UTC)