User talk:MariamKamal2021/sandbox

notes

Nooralhuda's Peer Review

I see that you have a good start that defines your aim of writing about this topic which is the women's portrayals in different cinemas in the Middle East. I was confused at first when I read in your introduction "one of the films released that year is called Sisters in Cinema" if you mean the 1990s or another year, so clarifying this part might help. The sections provided are having a clear structure and it is pretty organised where the reader can find the information that they need easily. I also noticed that you have a balanced coverage and neutral content where the examples given for each section is almost similar in amount of the one that follows it, however, Algeria section has less amount of information than the others which may be because of the fact that Algeria does not have too much about women's history in films, but still, it looks odd (try to fluff it, you can find a little bit more about Algerian female filmmakers). In my opinion, you did a great job with everything in the draft, and the sources used, look really trustworthy. Good Luck! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nour AlMannaei (talk • contribs) 10:02, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

Sara Buhadoud Peer Review

Your article had a strong lead, I read the first paragraph and I instantly knew what the article will discuss. Even after reading the whole article it all relates back to the first one. You had a balanced coverage throughout the article, I loved how you focused on different parts of the world instead of just one country. You showcased women from different countries, in addition to mentioning some of their production work. The article content is neutral, I did not notice anything bias. The claims are supported by more than one source which further eliminates bias, it also presents more than one person's point of view. Furthermore, I feel like it would be better to add more subheadings to your topic, such as what were the obstacle that women faced in movie making. I also checked a couple of references they do work and they seem reliable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sara buhadoud (talk • contribs) 12:03, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

Prof. PK's Comments

These are some good additional topics for the Women's Cinema page, but you still have work to do in terms of your diction and citations. Currently, the diction is still too similar to something you might write for class--you make a lot of very general, vague statements of the sort that we might find in introductory essay paragraphs. You need to remove these and focus on facts.

This brings me to your citations: you need more of them! One or two per paragraph is not enough; you need to be citing every fact. You also need more than one source per topic to avoid appearing biased.

Is there a reason you discuss male filmmakers in the Norway section? They seem out of place, so if scholars consider them part of women's cinema, you need to explain why.

Pkrayenbuhl (talk) 22:30, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

Reem Al-Khayat Peer Review

I think the introduction paragraph can be more focused, and that can be improved by inserting a fact about Women's Cinema from a trustworthy source. The sentences that are missing a citation can also be enhanced by making sure, every information or claim is supported by a reliable source.

I think the Norway Section could benefit from discussing why these specific female filmmakers matter, and what their septic contributions to cinema is, that has enabled them to become distinguished from the rest.

The Saudi Arabia section, only mentions one female filmmaker and no one else, I think it should be improved by highlighting other works done by female filmmakers in addition to her. Overall great job, and discussion about Women's Cinema. RalkhayatRalkhayat (talk) 10:46, 21 April 2019 (UTC)