User talk:Student5643/sandbox
Feedback on article contribution
[edit]Comments are in no particular order:
- Valenti and Blank have Wikipedia pages, so you could link to those. You could also provide citations for Blank and Carpenter since they are used to buttress Valenti.
- Look at Wiki's Manual of Style for treatment of titles.
- These last two sentences need some elaboration or clarification: Valenti reasons that the concept of virginity, though damaging and dangerous to women, does not exist. She supports this claim by describing the many individual definitions of virginity loss and by explaining that valuing virginity has placed a woman’s morality “between her legs.”[9]
- The construction of the first sentence seems to work against your intention. To say that something is damaging but it doesn't exist seems to disqualify the possibility of damage being done. Rephrasing would take care of this problem.
- The second sentence is a bit loaded to just leave it standing there alone. It essentially drops the bomb of Valenti's book-length critique of virginity without explanation, and then disappears. I'd suggest that unpacking, clarifying and explaining the import of this sentence is an essential part of revision/expansion/elaboration. You could also include, for balance, a critique of Valenti's perspective, if you have one handy.
- You also have a resource that discusses virginity in the LGBT community. One of Valenti's criticism of virginity is that it is heteronormative - does not take the LGBT community into account. That source may help you develop that idea also.--Jagrif02 (talk) 15:22, 19 October 2016 (UTC)