|This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to . If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.|
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
Critique an Article: WikiEd Assignment
The lead section of the article is underdeveloped, which I assume might be connected to the 'living persons' stipulations of wikipedia limits on what can be posted regarding living persons. The sources are peer-reviewed, which is great for reliability, but they span a nineteen year gap. Would finding some sources in between lend more validity? I also noticed that the inline citations are sparse, which I think should be remedied. Again, I'm wondering if the reason the article is shorter is because of the 'biography of living persons' concerns. Mhenkelman (talk) 16:05, 28 October 2016 (UTC)Mhenkelman
- @Mhenkelman: Those are great critiques: however, I would think you could point less at the concerns or policies of Wikipedia, more towards the lack of volunteer engagement in the page: you will notice that noone has made major contributions to the article since 2015, and before that 2011, and before that 2005: and all of these were relatively limited amoutns of information, without heavy referencing. If someone, like you, took the time to summarize sources, like this one from Fembio, it would not be hard to build out the article. I hope you take the opportunity to do just that :) After all, Wikipedia only works best when folks take the time to not only notice the gaps on Wikipedia, but also to Be bold and contribute a bit more to the project. Sadads (talk) 16:40, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
- @Sadads: Thanks for your help! I will definitely check out that source for summarizing and further development. Time to be bold.Mhenkelman (talk) 17:04, 28 October 2016 (UTC)Mhenkelman
A list of sources that I'm considering for updating the article, suggestions welcome!
--Zinn, Gesa. “Helke Sander and the Meaning of Laughter.” South Central Review, vol. 20, no. 2/4, 2003, pp. 131–142. http://www.jstor.org/stable/3189788.
--McCormick, Richard W. "Rape and War, Gender and Nation, Victims and Victimizers: Helke Sander's BeFreier und Befreite." Camera Obscura, 2001, p. 99. Academic OneFile,
--Michelson, Annette et al. “Further Thoughts on Helke Sander's Project.” October, vol. 72, 1995, pp. 89–113. http://www.jstor.org/stable/778930.
--McCormick, Richard. German Essays on Film.
--Stiglmayer, Alexandra. Mass Rape: The War Against Women.
--Silverman, Kaja. “Helke Sander and the Will to Change.” Discourse, vol. 6, 1983, pp. 10–30. http://www.jstor.org/stable/41389068. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mhenkelman (talk • contribs) 03:43, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
--http://www.fembio.org/english/biography.php/woman/biography/helke-sander/Mhenkelman (talk) 03:45, 1 November 2016 (UTC)Mhenkelman
- @Mhenkelman: That list is looking pretty good: you also want to make sure that you check out the following:
- I am also, noticing a lot of books that may be available to you via a university library in https://scholar.google.com : you might want to try to find more encyclopedia-like entries in reference works, for instance.
- Also, you don't have to generate your own citations: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Introduction_to_referencing_with_VisualEditor/1 . The Cite tool can frequently generate a really complete citation via JSTOR, Google Books and a number of other sources. Also, the formatting provided by the tools also allows computers to use the data in the citation. Keep up the great work! Sadads (talk) 01:17, 2 November 2016 (UTC)
Some ideas for consideration and revision
Not to just reiterate the Wikipedia notice on the article itself, but the article would be much more compelling should the introductory paragraph be beefed up; a substantial introduction would catch the eye and invite an in-depth reader by the visitor. Is Sander currently teaching or lecturing anywhere? It might be interesting to place what she's currently up to in the introductory paragraph. If she's still active in the field, that would be even more of a reason for the reader to become invested in her as a figure.
Unless I missed it, the section about her early life and education does not have any inline citations.
Perhaps a section about her overall film style or the particular themes she explores as a director and writer would help tie all her work together. (Her use of filters is mentioned in a paragraph above some of her more notable works, but perhaps this could be a standalone section.) I've noticed a good numbers of articles about artists incorporate this overarching information, as it helps the reader draw connections between as well as differentiate artists of the same school of thought, time period, etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jenmcorrigan (talk • contribs) 01:24, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
Peer Review Response
I definitely intend to flesh out the introduction. I'm hoping to include a statement from Helke Sander on her work, and also integrate her activism. Helke's work is available for rental requests and teaching purposes, but it seems that there are no recent events or contributions, as far as I can tell from her personal page--her last updated event occurred in 2014. However, she has been honored by several institutes, so that might be a good point to bring up!
Thanks for the heads up--I added inline citations to the section on her early life and education, a section created by a previous user.