User talk:Renae Green/sandbox

Hi. The article is good but needs work. I especially love the summary of both stories and the synopsis of who Anancy is. However, headings that are more fitting to the subject of the program would be suitable. I will further outline some weakness and strengths. 1. The article is written in an opinionated tone. 2. Individual themes can come out of the gender analysis section examples are masculinity and femininity. How were they portrayed in the article? Why were they portrayed that way based on the setting and time of the story? What constructed femininity and masculinity back then? Who's perspective was the story told from? 3. The article needs citations to support the claims as they may come off as biased and persuading, rather than objective and aligning with Wikipedia's regulations.T-99Willy (talk) 02:55, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

The section entitled background and history would be considered the lead section of the article. The photo is a good contribution to the piece and gives the article a pleasant visual. The lead section clearly expresses the subject of the article and sets the tone for the piece however there are two sentence fragments that need improving. You can consider rephrasing or compound the following sentence fragments. "Examine the differences found in both stories as well as the language used in both. In an effort to understand how language can be used in a gendered way". You can improve the piece by adding a subsection on Miss Louise Bennett that will give the readers an appreciable insight into the life of the writer and how her life and experiences influence the story. Miss Louise Bennett’s notable works and accomplishments can be added here. There are some spelling and grammatical errors throughout the article that needs to be rectified (summery - summary etc). The Summary of ‘Anancy and Lizard’ and ‘Anancy and Sorrel’ was well done and provides a good grasp of the story.

The tone of the article is not encyclopedic as it is written from your point of view in some sections and does not carry a neutral tone. You can make the article neutral and more encyclopedic by avoiding the use of the first-person narrative. The article has a clear structure and is organized in a sensible way however it can be developed by expounding on the gender theories and content analysis evident in both stories. Subsections for each theory that you wish to add or expound on can be separated in subsections to make the article easy to follow and aesthetically pleasing. The key areas identified you identified such as domestication of women and race can be discussed in separate subsections and expounded on in the analysis. You can speak on the act of the king giving his daughter's hand in marriage to the man who guesses her name as medieval patriarchal values as well as the value of women. Here, the editor can discuss the history of patriarchy and the patriarchal and misogynistic values of men. Make use of the hyperlinks throughout the article which will provide readers with more information on the selected topics such as deception and patriarchy. No references or citations were added to the piece for most of the statements made. You should properly cite using journal entry and textbooks, evenly attributed throughout the piece and avoid the single view point.

You can also introduce and analyze the use of the Jamaican Creole in the stories and the differences in linguistic patterns in both stories as well as what this might tell the readers about the settings of the story. A history of Jamaican Creole and attitudes towards the language can be provided which will give readers an insight into how language is used in a gendered way. The conclusion of the article is biased and may be persuading readers to think a specific way. Consider rephrasing this section and present the information in a more encyclopedic, factual way. YoungJamaicanedits (talk) 16:50, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Response to the Peer Reviewers
Hi @T-99Willy and @YoungJamaicanedits

I do understand your concerns. A lot of what you said re the Gender analysis was apart of my original plan. Nevertheless I will take your views into deep consideration for the Final Edit. Thank you for your honest opinions and suggestions.--ReigningQueen876 (talk) 22:25, 30 March 2021 (UTC)