User talk:YassineNUQ/sandbox

Peer review on Cinema of Middle East done by Maryam Al-Khalifa

Lead section: There was no lead section to introduce the subject matter.

Structure: The sections are very well organized in chronological order as the authors created a section from a list of countries within the Middle East. They added a brief history of the industry of country x and created a table for each country listing prominent directors and films from the region. However I believe they should add sub-headings under each country and explore their stylistic genres and identifiable characteristics and film techniques.

Coverage: There was a great balance of coverage with the use of information covering all areas of the region. Despite not completing all the list of countries yet, there was substantial amount of information on cinema at Lebanon, Palestine, Jordan and Egypt. However, I found that some countries like Egypt and Palestine served more in depth information regarding its historical and cultural context that other countries did not. I suggest including more information in regards to the other countries to let the readers explicitly identify the differences between Cinema in the Middle East region.

Content: The content was conveyed in a neutral tone that provided a more objective stance on the subject matter. The use of languages remained constant and didn't depict any bias especially in relation to any facts involving any political affiliations.

Sources: There was a variety of highly credible sources that effectively contributed to the topic and expanded Wikipedia's horizons into the Middle East. Among the sources used were University published journals, peer reviewed articles, films, academic books. The information used from the reliable sources provided effective content that helped improve on the original Wikipedia article.

Amal's Peer Review
Strengths: 1) The structure is clear and easy to follow. I like how you add the Notable Directors and Films for each category. It really helps with the coherence of the article. BUT since you're talking about history, it might help to break the bulks of writings down under dates. 2) Balanced coverage (based on Lebanon, Jordan, Egypt and Palestine) I did feel that Palestine's section could've been much stronger. It lacks parts about the diaspora cinemas. I'm missing Annimarie Jacir, and Elia Suleiman. 3) The content is neutral. It's actual history! 4) Sources are reliable and varied.

BUT- here are some things that you can imporve on.

Lebanon - As a result, studios started create films that were similar to the Egyptian melodramatic and bedouin films, which were doing great at the time. (doing great can be expressed differently.) - This lead to films that did not have a distinct Lebanese identity since Lebanese filmmakers were trying to imitate the success of Egyptian films while Egyptian filmmakers were creating their same old Egyptian films in Lebanon. (creating their same old Egyptian films? What are their old Egyptian films?)

Egypt - Eventually, they did more of these films/reels and also began creating short films. (what are thoseee?) - The flow of the second paragraph is all over the place.

Weaknesses: 1) Does the lead paragraph seem to be missing? Or are you going to keep the original? I suggest you elaborate on what's there. Perhaps you can tell me about the differences between these industries, and whether some are virtually non-existant, etc. 2) I am just worried that once you start getting in the Gulf countries that the content will be much less in comparison to the beginning. I think that if you don't find good content for Bahrain (for instance) that you should cut it out. For Qatar's section, you might want to check out our article as we're focusing on the Cinema of Qatar. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AmalAlMuftah (talk • contribs) 07:32, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

Noora AlKhalifa's Peer Review
The first thing that caught my eye about this article was that it did not have a title. This made it difficult for me to understand what I would be reading about since I did not know what to expect. The title is important because it can capture the reader’s attention and give them some idea about the contents of the article. Even though there is an overview paragraph, it discusses a very broad topic and since there was no title I still struggled to see what the focus of the article would be. If the topic was Middle Eastern cinema, more information could have been included in the overview and other clarification could have been made such which countries were included in that region and listed. I found the sections of the article well placed. Each section was arranged geographically by which country was being discussed. I thought this organization was ideal and made the article, which covers a vast topic, much more easy to navigate. The organization was also very consistent throughout, with the subsection presented in the exact same way. Furthermore, each section was almost equal in length and relevant. One section that I would suggest which seems relevant is a section on cinematic events held in those regions such as festivals or conventions. Overall, the organization and the content of the article were very effective. It is a broad topic and a more developed overview would read the reader makes sense of what they were about to read. In terms of the writing, some of the sentences were long and included more than one main idea which made it read a little less smoothly and could be improved. The information was presently in a very neutral manner and it was not possible to discern any biases by the author. The author also utilized many sources which made the article well researched. Nooraalkhalifa (talk) 20:42, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

Prof. PK's Comments
There's a lot of really great work here! Good sourcing, too. The first improvement I suggest: further streamlining your Overview section (and then merging it with the lead in the real Wiki page). It's a little difficult to follow right now, so try and make it as clear and simple as possible.

Otherwise, there are a lot of small things to attend to. For example, much of your first paragraph about Jordan is about one film--it probably therefore deserves a separate paragraph to itself. I also note some missing links throughout--for example, in the Saudi Arabia section, you're missing links to Haifaa al-Mansour and Wadjda; in Egypt, you need to link to The Square...etc.

Pkrayenbuhl (talk) 12:08, 1 April 2019 (UTC)