User:Cjyoung17/sandbox

*************FOR WIKI ARTICLE EDIT, GO TO LOGAN AUST'S SANDBOX

Article Selection 10/23

I plan on possibly editing the "Film" Wikipedia article. It does contain a lot of information but is also missing a ton. There is plenty of opportunities to add to the sections, as some of them are very vague. For example, in the "independent movies" section, there is zero mention of the Sundance Film Festival, which is arguably the largest Indie film festival. Another section that could be expanded on is the animation section. It briefly describes how animation is made, but doesn't provide any examples of movies or even production companies, such as Disney or DreamWorks, which have revolutionized and advanced the industry. This leaves a lot of room for addition.

Bibliography:

-Filipi, David. "Walt Disney Animation Studios Short Films Collection." Film Comment, vol. 51, no. 4, Jul/Aug2015, p. 76. EBSCOhost, libproxy.boisestate.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=108279637&site=ehost-live

-Robertson, Barbara. "Effects Artists and Animators at Dreamworks Animation Create a Cg Film Filled with Heroes and Humor." Computer Graphics World, vol. 35, no. 6, Oct/Nov2012, pp. 12-19. EBSCOhost, libproxy.boisestate.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=83719431&site=ehost-live.

Article Evaluation

"Digital Media"

Everything in this article is relevant and useful information. I did get a little hung up on the history section, because it did run a little long. This article is totally neutral because it focuses solely on history and facts, not opinions. One red flag is that the first link provided in the references does not lead directly to the article, but to the main website of said article. This could mean that article was taken down. Other than that, all the sources are academic studies and articles from universities which makes them credible. However, in the tak section, people are mentioning they had changed links because previous ones were irrelevant or untrustworthy which makes me skeptical.

This page closely follows how we discuss media in class, as it is based on facts and history and not opinions. It also appears reliable because it has been edited within the last week, meaning it is current.