User talk:Cbschramm/sandbox

Peer Review-Sarah

Hi Cissy! Great work so far. I've never heard of this director, so reading this was very enlightening and I think you do a good job of explaining her work to people who are unfamiliar. I particularly like the section about her LGBTQ characters. It's specific enough that it makes sense, and it works well when compared to other male directors who have very extensive Wikipedia articles. When you start to go through and edit this, I would suggest that you rephrase some of your sentences. For example "She felt as though there were not enough films that she or her brother could truly relate to while growing up, given that most films in mainstream cinema dealt with the pain of missing India and being away from home, while she had been born in Canada and therefore felt isolated from that community" is a little bit long, and you try to incorporate several points at once. Overall, you clearly have done extensive research on her and I think it's developing really well! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sikelley (talk • contribs) 01:25, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

Peer Review: Urmi Chatterjee

Cissy,

Great work so far! I think starting your research off with a film of Ganatra's gives you a much better view of her style of filmmaking before you delve even further into her work/films. Chutney Popcorn is a fascinating film and I think you, so far, have done a good job covering the main points. I like your use of quotations because, as a reader, this gives me more insight into the thought process and opinions of Gantra's filmmaking mindset. I really liked your subheading that looked more into sibling relationships and lesbian representations in the film, especially learning about conscious choices made by the filmmaker.

I think that you need to expand a few points. For example, the five Hindu rituals. What five Hindu rituals? There are many Hindu rituals, and 'ritual' can mean many things, be it religious or cultural. Keep in mind that both her and her films are barely talked about, so if this page introduces her films to audience members who are not familiar with intersectionality in terms of sexuality, religion, birth place, it can be a bit confusing because of the lack of information. As you proceed further, it would be nice to see more on this film because there's a lot to cover. Chutney Popcorn's Wikipedia page, let alone Ganatra's Wikipedia page, barely has any information. I think adding more on Ganatra's decisions and choices as a filmmaker, especially with relation to films like Chutney Popcorn (possibly her most well-known one) will make her page a more compelling read.Urmichatterjee (talk) 23:21, 6 April 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Urmichatterjee (talk • contribs) 05:27, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

Peer Review - Hans

I think all your information is great. The one thing I'm worried about a little is encyclopedic tone, particularly in discussion of what her own opinions are on the message of her work. I also wonder if using links instead of writing out a full description, particularly for things like the Hindu rituals (as gone into further detail by Urmi above), would be better for that tone aspect. Hlqu16 (talk) 16:41, 9 April 2018 (UTC)

Professor Schreiber Feedback

Cecilia - This is excellent work. I agree with your fellow students' feedback when they encourage you to take a more objective tone in your discussion of the film. I would revisit your language and make sure that whatever you are inserting into the analysis stems from comments that Ganatra has made, rather than your perspective or reading of her choices.--MJSProf (talk) 17:53, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

Response to feedback

Hi Sarah, Urmi, Hans, and Dr. Schreiber. Thank you so much for your kind feedback! I see what you're saying and will definitely work on adopting a more neutral/academic tone. Please see the bolded part above to see my attempts at improving what you guys mentioned as well. Thank you!Cbschramm (talk) 15:14, 17 April 2018 (UTC)