User:Ctweeten/sandbox

Article Evaluation

Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you?

One small bit that stood out to me was the subsection labeled Authority where the article is discussing important themes in Feed. The Authority section doesn't seem to have fleshed out ideas in it, and there are no citations to indicate that the ideas presented in it were drawn from a reliable source. I would recommend either taking that part out or doing more research on it to make the ideas on Authority in Feed more grounded in scholarly works.

Is the article neutral? Are there any claims, or frames, that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?

The themes section could be weighted out a little more evenly. A couple of my classmates in the talk page have noted that Consumerism gets talked about a lot more than Language and Authority. There are a lot of themes that could tie to Feed, and it's a shame to see that most of the themes portion is lacking.

Check a few citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article?

Unfortunately, only four of the twelve citations on Feed's page even have links to the articles online. The few that do have links all work. Considering that all four of the sources were related to awards that MT Anderson has received for Feed, I would say yes the sources do support claims made in the Awards and Nominations section of the article.

Is each fact referenced with an appropriate, reliable reference? Where does the information come from? Are these neutral sources? If biased, is that bias noted?

Most of the content that is not summary (and there is a lot of summary in Feed's article) is cited by reliable sources. The sources are from scholarly journals and magazines. While the sources are neutral and the content used from them is neutral, there is not an equal balance of discussion on Feed's article page, especially in the Themes section as I mentioned earlier. This could be seen as bias.

Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added?

I didn't notice anything out of date except the Talk page. The Talk page is pretty sparse to begin with, but the last comment made before our class was made by a bot in 2017. The last real person who commented on the Talk page was in 2014 which is really strange when you look at the article's View History. There have been edits made just a couple months ago and all throughout 2017. I don't know why those people weren't talking on the Talk page.

Check out the Talk page of the article. What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?

There is not a lot of content on Feed's Talk page. The only person who was planning to make any changes to the article was a user named Grapefr00t who I presume is a student (or was a student) and Grapefr00t's professors. However, those additions to the Talk page were made back in 2012, and according to the article's rating of class C on the WikiProject Novel's quality scale, there is still a lot that needs to be done to improve the article. I was a little confused by the External Links Modified section on the Talk page. It says it was created by Internet Archive Bot and I don't know what that is. I thought Wikipedia was only edited by real people, not bots.

How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?

Feed's page is part of WikiProject Novels. According to Feed's Talk page, the article has a class C rating which means it has a substantial amount of work or "cleanup" that needs to be done. WikiProject Novel's rating scale indicates that a class C article is good for a casual reader who just wants the gist of a book, but it is not very reliable for any in-depth research. To put it in context, a class C article is one step higher than an article with a Start rating (a rating which means the article is still developing and needs to be completed) and a class B rating (which means the article doesn't have any major errors but still is not complete enough to satisfy a serious researcher's standards.)

How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?

When we have class discussions, people give their own opinions and ideas about different topics surrounding Feed, but on Wikipedia, the discussion is much less biased. Seeing as it is one of Wikipedia's core principals not to have personal opinions on articles, it makes sense why the Feed article is so objective as opposed to our classrooms discussions which are by nature more subjective.

Article Improvement

Wikipedia's article on Faulkner's novel, Absalom, Absalom!, has been given a rating of "start" quality and "high" importance. Alternatively, its article on Faulkner's novel, Light in August, has been nominated as a "good" article of "high" importance. Why does Absalom, Absalom! fall so short?

Look at both articles carefully. Check out the Talk Pages for each. Imagine you were preparing to improve Absalom, Absalom! in both content and in style. Draft a brief plan of action in your sandbox.

What content would you want to contribute?

One large part that Light in August has that Absalom Absalom! doesn't is a Themes section. This could probably be put in place of the Analysis section that Absalom Absalom! has now. A Wikipedia page having an Analysis section seems to imply that the Wikipedia editor did the analysis using their own opinions. I would also contribute a Reception section to Absalom Absalom! seeing as Light in August has one. That information could be useful to some readers, perhaps who are doing research on this novel.

What research steps would you take to get that information?

The Notes section looks like it could use some work because the citations seem sparse and lacking a lot of information about the sources. I would start there, following the links to the notes that are already on Absalom Absalom!'s page and making sure they are cited properly. I'd make sure the sources are credible and actually provide the information that it is cited for. Then I would try looking for more scholarly articles written about Absalom Absalom! to try and get a better understanding of the themes and critical reception of the book.

What recommendations would you propose to the style or organization?

My advice about style would be particularly geared toward the Analysis section. This section as it is now has citations, but the citations don't all necessarily back up the claims made which makes me wary that the section was written using the editor's own opinions. I would bring attention to this on the Absalom Absalom! talk page to let people know that additional research needs to be done for this section in order to include it by Wikipedia's standards.

Hannah's Article Ideas

Jurassic Park

• Add reviews and critics reception
• Make the plot more concise
• Add a themes as well as characters section
• More sources (not movies)
• Difference between film and the novel.

The Fellowship of the Ring

• Add themes and characters section
• More in critical reception
• Make plot summary more concise
• More references to strengthen credibility.

The Return of Sherlock Holmes

• Add plot/ reason for the book. (motives)
• Critical receptions
• More references

Winnie the Pooh

• (Sorry, my love of children's books)
• Add plot/ history of the collection
• Receptions as well as critical receptions
• Add themes and characters
• As well as adding more references to the page.

Clarice's Article Ideas

A Room With a View

• The plot needs to be shortened a lot
• Unnecessary sections like Writing and Appendix should be taken out and the information can be put under other larger sections
• More References should be added to the Reflist
• A lot of information, particularly under the sections Allusions/References to Other Works and Stage, Film, Radio, and Television Adaptations needs to be cited

The Blithedale Romance

• The banner at the top of the page currently says that the lede needs to be lengthened and give a fuller summary of the scope of the article.
• Possibly shorten some parts like the plot.
• I don't know how, but we should recommend this for at least a Class C article, maybe even Class B once we make the changes I mentioned. This article has a Start rating right now, but it seems pretty well-developed to me.

The Phantom of the Opera

• Banner at the top of this one says that the article contains mainly plot summary. I checked and this is indeed the case.
• Some topics that could be considered being added include critical reception, themes, influences, and awards.
• More research needs to be done. The article only has 2 references.

Final Ideas for Project

The Phantom of the Opera

• Banner at the top of this one says that the article contains mainly plot summary. I checked and this is indeed the case.
• Some topics that could be considered being added include critical reception, themes, influences, and awards.
• More research needs to be done. The article only has 2 references.

The Return of Sherlock Holmes

• Add plot/ reason for the book. (motives)
• Critical receptions (How this book was received)
• More references
• Adding more about each section of the book, just a little synopsis.

For the other ones in my section we decided that we both didn't have a collective knowledge on these already. This would be something that is difficult to find credible sources that we don't know are true or not. Since we both didn't think we could find the sources, we decided to eliminate these since we have a time frame of when this needs to be done. With the Winnie the Pooh page, it was more vague and with all the sections that the first book, it seemed like a huge project to tackle especially with no clear place to begin the research. Making sure that we both felt that we knew a comfortable amount of information about the article was a huge persuasion in what articles we decided on.

For the other two in the other category, we didn't choose these for the same reason as mine. Since we didn't feel as comfortable in these ones we felt as though the research would be lengthy and need of some background knowledge wouldn't be there. We wanted to have the goal of trying to work on an article that we both had some knowledge about coming in to and one that we had a good amount of editing we could do for the assignment. Working on the plot and then finding more references for either of the two articles that we finalize on, seems to be the main focal point for us to begin with.

Finalized Topic

Plan of Action for The Phantom of the Opera

• We will look over the plot section of this article and try to make it more concise than it is right now. This will help with the ease of reading, while also giving more attention to other sections of the article.
• We want to add critical receptions within this article to help with the context of how this novel was reviewed and thought of at the time.
• The amount of references on this page are limited and we want to find more scholarly articles to help strengthen the content in the article as well as build the credibility of it.
• With this new research done, we hope to be able to build new sections into the article such as themes, influences, awards, etc. This can help the readers learn more about the novel and it's origins rather than just reading the plot.

Bibliography

• Bingham, Megan. "A History of Classic Monsters: The Phantom of the Opera | Librarypoint." Librarypoint | The Central Rappahannock Regional Library
  • This article has background on Gaston Leroux and how the idea of Phantom of the Opera  came to be. It also gives information on the on screen adaptations of this book.  It gives the onscreen adaptations from the first on screen performance to the movie. This can be helpful to add more into the article to give it more substance. The article also gives some information on the plot of the story, which could be helpful in shortening the plot.
    • With the story being published into different newspapers around the world, the book began to become more popular.
    • The element that is the most prevalent in the novel is the use of the narrator’s voice within the story.
• Fisher Digital Publications | St. John Fisher College Research
  • This article discusses the remaining popularity about the story whether it is in the form of the movie, musical, or the novel. Drumright discusses the different reasons for why this story is so popular one hundred years later. She also gives context to the plot, which can be helpful when trying to make it more concise. As well as giving characteristics of different characters to add to this as well to help build this section.
    • An interesting aspect of the story that hooked readers was that it is written as though it was written as nonfiction.
    • What might account for this is his occupation as a newspaper journalist.
    • Another reason this book might be so popular is because there are multiple genres in one novel to fit the like of many audiences. (romance, mystery, etc.)
• "Where the Phantom Was Born: the Palais Garnier." Telegraph.co.uk, 17 Feb. 2010
  • Lucinda Everett goes into detail about where the idea of the opera house in Leroux’s novel came from. With the history given and the claim by Leroux while he was dying about how it was haunted helps show some of the ideas of where he got his information. Leroux blended the ideas from a real opera house and the fiction in which he wrote The Phantom of the Opera.
    • Leroux made the claim, even while dying, that the opera house he visited was haunted.
    • As he grew up during the construction of this opera house, it was a way in which he blended real facts with the fiction in his story.
    • Some details of his story are found within the real walls of the Palais Garnier opera house.
• "The Phantom of the Opera: Myth Versus Reality." CMUSE, 22 July 2016. (Maybe)
  • The article goes into detail about Webber’s interpretation for the movie, while also discussing the characters. It also gives a reasonable amount of detail about the plot to draw on when trying to rewrite the plot. It shows some similarities between the musical and the novel as well as tying it to historical events.
    • The novel and the musical have a similarity in terms of the event of the chandelier, which was based on an actual event that happened at an opera house.
    • The idea of the novel and it’s setting wasn’t one that came strictly from his mind, he was a theater critic during his time as a journalist.
• "The Phantom of the Opera, by Gaston Leroux : Prologue." EBooks@Adelaide (archive). (Maybe)
  • The excerpt is a writing from Leroux himself where he is trying to convince the audience that the ghost is actually real. He discusses the events and articles that led him to this conclusion of it not being a superstition. It shows his journalism as a part of him and how he talked to many about this person when trying to figure out the “Persian” ghost.
    • He preformed interviews with the opera-house management and staff to find evidence and history to prove that this ghost was real.
    • He used books and archives as well to help support his research on the opera-house.
    • His research led him to how he could connect the corpse to the opera ghost.  
• Haining, Peter. “The Man Who Created the Phantom.” The Phantom of the Opera - Official Website, Sept. 1986.
  • This excerpt on the Phantom of the Opera official website focuses mainly on the author Gaston Leroux and his life. It talks about influences on his writing including the works of Edgar Allen Poe and Sir Arthur Conan Doyle. It also discusses the critical reception of the novel Phantom of the Opera and how it wasn't super popular when it first came out. The story gained popularity when a film happened to be made of it in 1925. However, Leroux died 2 years later in 1927, so he didn't get to see the success that his story would one day come to be.
    • This source will help with our critical reception piece that we will be working on
    • This source can also help with an influencers section if we decide to have one
    • It will be most helpful in any section where we talk about the author. Perhaps this source could even be suggested on Gaston Leroux's talk page.

As the official site of the musical, this will be viewed as potentially self-referential. Given that the writer (a reporter) is credited, you might be able to synthesize material learned here, but make sure you're working with facts or that any claims can be independently verified.Aschuet1 (talk) 19:58, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

• Fitzpatrick, Sean. “The Phantom of the Opera by Gaston Leroux: Triumphant Tragedy.” Crisis Magazine, 26 Jan. 2017.
  • This is a magazine review of the Phantom of the Opera novel. While its author seems to be well educated on the novel and information surrounding it, the article is mostly made of the author's opinions. With that in mind, the information in the review should be taken with a grain of salt, but many of the critic's opinions are shared by other contemporary critics.
    • This article calls Phantom of the Opera a "crime novel" which could help us fit it in a genre
    • The opinions of the author could be helpful for a "current critical reception" section of the page
    • Says the novel is "not a great book, but it is a great read"
• Myers, Cathleen. “THE PHANTOM'S EVOLUTION.” PEERS.
  • Most of this critical review talks about the adaptations and spin-offs that have been made of Phantom of the Opera, but the beginning few paragraphs talk about the novel. The author's opinion is that the book is a poorly written crime novel, but the plot is riveting, especially when brought onto the theatrical stage. The critic goes in depth into the style that Leroux used in the novel, saying that the style ultimately failed to achieve any sort of suspense that a crime/thriller novel should have.
    • Like the critical review by Fitzpatrick, this review could be used in a section titled "current critical reception"
    • This article gives insights into the style of how the book was written (i.e. using an omniscient narrator as well as a journalistic narrator who pulls his knowledge from newspapers, interviews, etc.)
• “The Phantom of the Opera by Gaston Leroux, Annotated Edition.” Edited by Mireille Ribiere, Mireille Ribiere Writings, Photographs, 2014.
  • This excerpt was included in the 2012 Penguin Classics annotated edition of Phantom of the Opera. This piece was written by the translator and editor of the new edition, Mireille Ribiere, and gives an in-depth look into Leroux, the characters in Phantom of the Opera, historical context, adaptations of the novel, themes, influences, and critical reception.
    • This source, which is extremely reliable seeing as it was published in an annotated version of the novel, could be used to yield information on just about any section of the Phantom of the Opera page.
• “The Phantom of the Opera (Literature).” TV Tropes.
  • This source is an alphabetical list of tropes commonly seen in stories and applies these tropes to Phantom of the Opera. Some examples of the tropes included are "Angry Mob Song" which in Phantom of the Opera is called "Track Down This Murderer" and the trope that "The Fourth Wall Will Not Protect You" indicating that, since the musical is set in an opera house and the audience is sitting in a similar setting while they watch the musical, they are made to feel like the Phantom is stalking the very theatre that they are in.
    • I'm realizing that this source is not entirely helpful for the novel's Wikipedia page because a lot of the tropes relate back to the musical rendition of the story which has its own separate Wikipedia page.

This is a "pop culture" wiki and as such will function like Wikipedia, meaning it will be viewed as using an encyclopedia to write an encyclopedia article. Aschuet1 (talk) 19:58, 25 April 2018 (UTC)