User talk:Thestrongestonehere
| This user is a student editor in Carleton_University/Analyzing_Cinema,_Gender,_and_Sexuality_(Fall_2019) . |
Welcome!
[edit]Hello, Thestrongestonehere, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:
You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.
Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or , and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! Home Lander (talk) 01:16, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
Welcome!
[edit]Hello, Thestrongestonehere, and welcome to Wikipedia! My name is Shalor and I work with the Wiki Education Foundation; I help support students who are editing as part of a class assignment.
I hope you enjoy editing here. If you haven't already done so, please check out the student training library, which introduces you to editing and Wikipedia's core principles. You may also want to check out the Teahouse, a community of Wikipedia editors dedicated to helping new users. Below are some resources to help you get started editing.
Handouts
|
|---|
Additional Resources
|
|
If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 18:54, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
Notes
[edit]Hi! I have some notes for you on your draft:
The career and legacy sections contain a lot of content that comes across as an opinion and like it's written in favor of Onwurah and her work. These should always be attributed to the person making the claim, especially with opinions. Interpretations can sometimes be written in a more general fashion, however they must be something that is very widely held and seen to be true. Even then, they need to be written so that it's clear that it's a summary of the critics' interpretations, if that makes sense.
It's also important to make sure that this reads neutrally, as some of the content - particularly the legacy section - comes across as kind of promotional. I know this isn't your intent, but it's still necessary to be careful. I'd review the article on Alfred Hitchcock to see how his themes and motifs section is written.
That said, your sourcing looks to be very good and once you fix the attribution and neutrality issues, this should be ready to move live. I've tried to do some attribution, but it's kind of clunky as a result. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 18:25, 18 October 2019 (UTC)
Ngozi Onwurah
[edit]Minor revisions needed.
- Great job! Well-written and well-integrated into the existing article.
- Ensure that the writing maintains a neutral point of view throughout: i.e. first sentence in the Legacy section should be clearly attributed to the author (i.e. “According to Foster, Onwurah has pushed the limits…”), and that the second sentence is cited.
- I recommend that you add to the lead section to make it a full paragraph, as that is a standard feature of Wikipedia articles. Some guidelines here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Lead_section
- Other than that, you'll be ready to move your work to mainspace!
CropMilk (talk) 15:08, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
Overall
- Summaries are thoughtful but could be condensed and clarified
- A table may be useful in the "Awards and Nominations" section; this was suggested after I removed colons after feature titles
- The article is well resourced, and well written, as well as informative