User talk:Nmunoz26/sandbox

Hey Lady! I enjoyed the article! Here are a few notes, the only edits I made within the article are minor wording to make it seem more neutral.

The contemporary feminist porn association acquired solemn momentum in the 2000s because of The Feminist Porn Awards (FPAs) by Good For Her in Toronto in 2006, which place the notion of overall introduced feminist porn to society. -reworking wording, hard to follow

-cite the FPAs? -cite club 90 (second section) -her aspirations surely can be viewed as feminist, (needs to be neutral) -Section 2 (femme Productions) was very well done! Throughout the past decade many women emerge to have turn out to be disillusioned with Dworkin and her anti-porn perspectives, perceiving them as excessively polarized and anti-sex -rework wording, hard to follow

(proliferation of porn) -cite who Mackinnon is -the sentence structure is hard to follow. -take out the conclusion section, having a conclusion indicates that the conclusion is stemming from an argument, which isn’t neutral. Include that part within the initial paragraph Bmiller (talk) 20:57, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Nmunoz26, you have a lot to contribute to the stub article on Feminist pornography; you'll just need to remember that it is an article on feminist pornography, not feminist views on pornography (but some of your material, especially the stuff on Dworkin and MacKinnon, can be added to that article, also a stub).

I suggest that before you add anything to the article, you review the article's talk page, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Feminist_pornography. I agree with those contributors that the current introductory paragraph needs revision, but your first paragraph isn't quite what's needed, either. Let's talk about this in class on Tuesday.

The sections about Femme Productions/Candida Royalle, Annie Sprinkle, Feminism and the proliferation of pornography for Women, and material from the conclusion can certainly be added, although probably not in that order. The same with much of the quoted material, but look for ways to paraphrase - Wikipedia tries to avoid large sections of long quotations.

E. Kissling (talk) 23:50, 2 June 2013 (UTC)