User talk:Ravens NN/sandbox

The article that you have created is good and the filmmaker you chose is interesting to read about. There were some minor grammatical mistakes throughout the article. In early life and education, the second paragraph talks about her first two films in school, but you only mention one. It would be a good idea to add the name of the other one. Also, the last sentence in this paragraph is a bit confusing. Going on, the timeline of this section is a bit muddied, with you introducing and re-introducing films. The next paragraph, starting with the sentence "Work that circulates...", that sentence is very confusing and should be revised. Overall, I think the filmmaker you chose and how you structured the article is very good. Some of your timeline and sentence structure should be revised in order to make the article more clear to the reader. Also, I would advise you use more sources and rely less on the source by Van de Peer. In addition, I don't know if its the best write "According to Van de Peer" in the article, but rather just add a the citation to his article. I think the article you wrote has great potential, just needing some fine tuning.