User talk:Wikistellar96
| This user is a student editor in Carleton_University/Analyzing_Cinema,_Gender,_and_Sexuality_(Fall_2019) . |
Welcome!
[edit]Hello, Wikistellar96, 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) 20:12, 6 September 2019 (UTC)
Draft notes
[edit]Hi! I have some draft notes for you:
- I made some edits to the background section for flow, plus added the date of her graduation from Harvard.
- The career section needs to have the content split up into subsections since there's so much content there. My recommendation is to split it up into years. Maybe start with 1990s - 2002 and go with four year spans afterwards? The section just needs some general organizing.
- Be very careful about wording. The following sentence is an example of how a rather innocuous term can change meaning depending on where it's used:
- The film captures the unfolding of war through the descriptions and contributions of entities in media outlets.
- With this the word "captures" implies an opinion on the film, as this is a term that is used often in marketing materials and reviews. It's one of those words that wouldn't really be seen as an issue pretty much anywhere else but in an encyclopedia can have a loaded meaning. It's better to use the term depicts, as this is more neutral sounding. This is one of those little quirks that you really don't learn about until you start editing on Wikipedia, to be honest. I learned about terms like that the hard way as I'd used them all in articles elsewhere.
- Now that aside, also be careful of words like "passion" since those are seen as marketing terms. The background section had this word, which is part of the reason why I edited it some.
- This is kind of part of the last point - If you're quoting or referencing something said in a review, make sure that you attribute the claim to the person making it, so it doesn't come across as original research or an opinion statement.
- So for example, the following passage needs to be attributed to the review (and the reviewer in specific) backing up the statements:
- Throughout this creative path, Noujaim who filmed the majority of Control Room herself, never poses her own opinion on the topic in the film’s story or give insight on her personal perception of war. The neutral stream for the film gives little guidance to viewers, prioritizing their interpretation, an artistic choice on behalf of Noujaim.
- You can do this by way of the following:
- In a review for Control Room Bill Stamet felt that...
- It's important so that it doesn't come across as Wikipedia espousing a specific viewpoint of the film or endorsing it, which would interfere with neutrality.
I think that you're definitely on the right path here, as it's definitely better to expand on what's in the article already than to try to recreate it entirely, so a lot of this is going to be more fine-tuning and polishing the draft up so it can be moved live. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 21:19, 17 October 2019 (UTC)
Jehane Noujaim
[edit]Minor revisions needed.
- Great job! Well-structured with good sources overall.
- Ensure that all your factual claims are cited (i.e. “In 1992, Noujaim matriculated to Harvard University, where she initially intended to study medicine,” and that the tone remains neutral throughout.
- When you move the article to mainspace, make sure that you only add the parts that you’ve written, rather than replacing the entire article. Other than that, you’re good to go!