Talk:The Ways of White Folks

Wiki Education assignment: African American Literature I

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 26 August 2022 and 8 December 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Allithegr8 (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Rivera.joel3 (talk) 18:28, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

Short Story Cycle Discussion

Allithegr8 (talk) 14:11, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello! I just removed some information regarding The Ways of White Folks and its status as a short story cycle. The information came from https://docsouth.unc.edu/southlit/blacklit.html, however this is the only source I could find that acknowledged the collection's status as a short story cycle. Moreover, the source did not include any explanation or analysis of how Hughes' short stories function as a cycle and interplay between one another. Additionally, upon some reading upon the various disputed definitions of a short story cycle, I think the assertation that The Ways of White Folks is a short story cycle is contestable. Since the previous author did not leave any additional exploration of the short story cycle feature, and only included the information in the article's lead, I removed the information.

I believe this could be an interesting topic to elaborate upon for the future, but based on the information included and my understanding of a short-story cycle, I felt that for the time being, the information should be removed Allithegr8 (talk) 14:11, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

Peer review

The lead section was really well done and followed all checkpoints. It is concise and gives all necessary information. The content that was added is definitely relevant to the topic. Something I would consider changing is leaving the description of "Cora Unashamed" that you put under "Contents" for the "Summary" section. This will keep that section more concise and follow the same format of the other 14 short stories listed. I think the summary you added is great and informative but also to the point. It didn't include any biased information and gave all facts objectively. I noticed that there are two "Reception" sections which was weird so maybe clarify that. The first reception section seems more tailored towards the first short story so I would retitle it to be specifically for that story. I didn't see any changes made in the references sectionfor some reason, but I think I noticed two sources that had to do with the short story you talked about there, so not sure if those were already there. All information added was cited by a source which is good. If you did take information from new sources that you included in your annotated bibliography, then make sure you include those in your "References". The information was organized well and it was easy to follow. You could maybe look into including more pictures if available of the specific short story you talked about. Overall, the edits made were good and beneficial to the page. I would look into making more edits maybe surrounding certain themes of the short story and how this ties into discrimination. You mentioned in the lead about power dynamics and racial issues, so maybe making more sections that go into detail about that would be great as well. If you expand more on what you have, than I think you're on the right track! Nairmeera02 (talk) 20:40, 6 December 2022 (UTC)