Vgao16
| This user is a student editor in Santa_Clara_University/Literacy_and_Social_Justice_(Spring) . |
Welcome!
editHello, Vgao16, and welcome to Wikipedia! My name is Shalor and I work with the Wiki Education Foundation; I help support students who are editing as part of a class assignment.
I hope you enjoy editing here. If you haven't already done so, please check out the student training library, which introduces you to editing and Wikipedia's core principles. You may also want to check out the Teahouse, a community of Wikipedia editors dedicated to helping new users. Below are some resources to help you get started editing.
Handouts
|
|---|
Additional Resources
|
|
If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 19:03, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
Moved page to sandbox
editHi! I moved your page back to your sandbox because there were a few issues, namely original research, essay tones, and opinion statements.
The main issue is that this is more of an essay than a Wikipedia article per se. I think that it's partially a result of the topic area (Feminism and the Portrayal of the Female Body in Chinese Contemporary Art) being so narrow and specific. This is a topic area that would be a good choice for an essay, however with Wikipedia it's a little too specific. It makes it harder to find sources that specifically cover this area, as you may have sources that broach the general topic of the female body in Chinese Contemporary Art or feminism in China or Art (for example), but not really "Feminism and the Portrayal of the Female Body in Chinese Contemporary Art" - which is what you specifically need here. We can only summarize what authorities have already stated on the topic - we can't create new conclusions, claims, opinions, or research that isn't explicitly stated in the source material. For example, something like " What made her artwork even more controversial" is seen as a personal opinion. We can say something like "According to Jane Smith, He's exhibition was controversial for several reasons; public nudity was taboo in China and He had spontaneously joined in an an installation by H.A. Schultz that was being exhibited on the Great Wall." This attributes the claim of controversy to a specific person. It also summarizes it in a way that removes any unattributed opinion statements like "Therefore, "Opening of the Great Wall" could be considered as a particularly bold piece done by a Chinese women artist". Something like this can be fine if it's attributed and written a certain way, but otherwise this comes across like it's you yourself that's making the claim.
However original research can also be things like choosing to highlight one artwork or artist over another. With highlighting specific artists or artworks, you must show enough sourcing to show where they're routinely cited as a good example of the specific topic. The reason is that otherwise it's generally seen on Wikipedia as a personal choice and other editors can challenge it, asking why a specific person or art work was chosen over another.
I hope that this helps - let me know on my talk page if you have any questions! Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 14:49, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
- Hi - it looks like your article was moved to the draftspace at Draft:Feminist interventions by contemporary Chinese women artists since it still has a lot of the issues that I mentioned above. I think that it may be a good option to go more general, such as "feminism in Chinese art". I wouldn't highlight specific examples of artists and their works unless there is a lot of coverage to justify highlighting them like this. Be cautious with highlighting individual people or artworks in a lot of detail because other than original research concerns as posted above, the persons or artworks may not actually be representative of feminism in Chinese art as a whole as the art may not be well known or it may be so different from the standard feminist Chinese art that it doesn't really work as a good example. In other words, that one person or artwork may not actually represent the average feminist artist or artwork.
- I wouldn't move it back live until these issues have been resolved. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 13:13, 8 June 2018 (UTC)