Talk:Gender in slasher films

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Peer Reviews[edit]

Hey sorry I did not get to editing your article I was pretty busy last week. However, I like what you have going here! You have a good direction here I just caution that you do not want your article to be too leading without research. I will look more at it tonight and I can help wikify it for you. (Snarkyr2unit91 (talk) 14:00, 2 April 2012 (UTC))

Correct me if I'm wrong, when you cite authors (even coauthors) one separates first and last names with commas. Because it's a journal I'm not sure what the rules are with listing of the authors compared with coauthors, I mean in terms of the semicolon in between the names so you are probably right there but I am pretty sure that you have to put in commas in between names. I didn't change anything there but do keep that in mind and feel free to check me on that I could be wrong. Best! (Snarkyr2unit91 (talk) 19:00, 2 April 2012 (UTC))

Your article is so interesting. I like how you have links to different wikipedia articles within your own. This makes the article seem more official and more likely to be trusted. Good Work! (Jordarenna (talk) 13:38, 4 April 2012 (UTC)).

Hey! I think you have your article broken down into clear and informative subtopics. I agree with Jordarenna, I also like how you have different links throughout your article - clearly you have done a lot of research, nice job! :) Jillgeib {talk} Jillgeib (talk) 13:50, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Hey! Sorry I've been mia for so long, I like where your article is going! There are very strong sexual themes in slasher flicks, a lot of it has to do the with interest of viewing and sexuality is a strong draw for audiences. Sex and violence are the two greatest draws of audiences to films these days. I'm wondering where else are you taking your article. I'm excited to hear more about it tomorrow in class tomorrow! (Snarkyr2unit91 (talk) 08:35, 18 April 2012 (UTC))

You could maybe split up the Sex and violence section into two separate sections. Also, under the sub heading of sex I feel like you could break it down into a nice chart of of like an example for each thing that Cowan breaks it down (flirting, breast exposure, etc.) (Abulak) —Preceding undated comment added 13:41, 18 April 2012 (UTC).

Also I don't think you included or used this article yet http://heinonline.org/HOL/Page?handle=hein.journals/jbem35&div=45&g_sent=1&collection=journals It seems to have some information that you haven't included yet (Abulak) —Preceding undated comment added 13:44, 18 April 2012 (UTC).

You could do the same chart idea to expand on the different types of stereotypes (jock, the brains, the whore, the moron the virgin) under the section Stereotypes (Abulak)

Your first sentence is a quote in the section effects on viewers, I think it is a good quote but I think you should put a sentence or two building into that quote (Abulak)

Also Effects on viewers would read easier if you broke up the paragraph into a few of them, just make sure it still flows when you do so. (Abulak) —Preceding undated comment added 19:08, 18 April 2012 (UTC).

Impact of recent student edits[edit]

This article has recently been edited by students as part of their course work for a university course. As part of the quality metrics for the education program, we would like to determine what level of burden is placed on Wikipedia's editors by student coursework.

If you are an editor of this article who spent time correcting edits to it made by the students, please tell us how much time you spent on cleaning up the article. Please note that we are asking you to estimate only the negative effects of the students' work. If the students added good material but you spent time formatting it or making it conform to the manual of style, or copyediting it, then the material added was still a net benefit, and the work you did improved it further. If on the other hand the students added material that had to be removed, or removed good material which you had to replace, please let us know how much time you had to spend making those corrections. This includes time you may have spent posting to the students' talk pages, or to Wikipedia noticeboards, or working with them on IRC, or any other time you spent which was required to fix problems created by the students' edits. Any work you did as a Wikipedia Ambassador for that student's class should not be counted.

Please rate the amount of time spent as follows:

  • 0 -No unproductive work to clean up
  • 1 - A few minutes of work needed
  • 2 - Between a few minutes and half an hour of work needed
  • 3 - Half an hour to an hour of work needed
  • 4 - More than an hour of work needed

Please also add any comments you feel may be helpful. We welcome ratings from multiple editors on the same article. Add your input here. Thanks! -- LiAnna Davis (WMF) (talk) 20:46, 27 May 2012 (UTC)