User talk:Valerie Wittman/sandbox

Suggestions/edits

Your article looks great; lots of information and links to other works, and the list of works helps give a chronological perspective. Maybe you can talk about the history of Fox after working with Pickett (possibly how propaganda has shaped their mentality today in the news world).Cjlombar2 (talk) 15:40, 30 November 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cjlombar2 (talk • contribs) 15:37, 30 November 2014 (UTC)

in text citation

I see that you use parenthesis to cite a lot of your works; I don't believe you need these if they are already in your reflist — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cjlombar2 (talk • contribs) 15:56, 30 November 2014 (UTC)

Sections

You could create a section just titled Redskin and sum up all of that info in it. You could also do the same for the American Red Cross films, it seems like there is enough info to make that separate as wellCjlombar2 (talk) 16:05, 30 November 2014 (UTC)

I think you did a great job by separating the different films (written/directed/etc.), it was easy to read and well organized. Good article, I enjoyed reading it. Pjplummer (talk) 16:00, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

Early life and Career

Possibly move this section before the main part of the article just so that biographical info proceeds anything she did during her professional careerCjlombar2 (talk) 16:06, 30 November 2014 (UTC)

Draft comments

Hi, @Valerie Wittman: I'm providing support for your course and I just have a few comments on your draft. Overall it looks great. It's well referenced and clear and does a good job summarizing the subject:

• Articles generally have a lead section summarizing the content for a reader who may just want some quick details. Take a look at an article I wrote, Markus Brunnermeier for what an appropriate summary might look like. You don't need to reference individual elements in that summary, because they're referenced in the body.
• In the filmography you have a few lines which

look like this

• ...have a leading space. For something like the filmography you'll want to start out those lines with an asterisk ("*") and it will render a bullet before each (and keep them on separate lines)
• When you add your content to Elizabeth Pickett Chevalier make sure to retain the categories and links (which are currently on the bottom of the page)

Overall this is great work. If you're interested, there's a process called "Did you know?" where you can have your article placed on wikipedia's main page for a day. Articles posted via "did you know" often see one to two thousand readers over those two days. The application process takes a bit of work and there's a 7 day deadline (it's described here) and I'm happy to help you with it. Adam (Wiki Ed) (talk) 20:29, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

Suggestions :)

Overall the article is definitely in great shape! Only a couple of things stood out to me:

• Pickett writing the first short series for Fox is a big deal. I feel like more information could be offered in regards to what that meant for Fox going forward after (higher ratings, profits, statistics, bigger audience, etc.).

• You list off “Navajo, Wolf Fangs, Wings of the Storm, and Money Talks” in her Film Career section. However, these are also listed in her filmography. I wouldn’t throw them in the Film Career section unless you clarify the significance of them (best-known, highest rated, etc.). Otherwise the sentence is somewhat random.

• Be sure to add a summary section at the beginning. Starting off with the Film Career section feels like it jumps right in to the middle of an essay for the reader. And add an image :)

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Bsenopou (talk • contribs) 03:39, 2 December 2014 (UTC)