User talk:Collegekid2020/sandbox

1. I think that the information you added is a very useful addition to improve the quality of the overall article. Just a heads up, I was unable to find you draft in your sandbox, so I looked at the current article that is posted and peer reviewed it as is.

2. I think one of the main changes I would make would be in adding more sources to support more of the information. I noticed that there were almost no citations in the sections on "Today" and "Indigenous Feminism." Adding more citations would help to support the information and show Wikipedia that the information comes from reliable sources. In the article, overall, the neutral language was alright but there were a few sentences that I found to be not quite as neutral as Wikipedia would want, so I think it would be beneficial to look back at these sentences and other parts to check for non-neutral language. The sentences I found were:

• "However because of many military coups and dictatorships in Latin America, feminist lesbian groups have had to break up..." I would just spin this sentence in a way that generally talks about the groups challenges.
• "They've also sought to challenge traditional nationalists who oppress women and use their political influence..." I think this sentence would be alright if it was a direct quote, but without a quote it shows a clear bias.

-Also one part under the Indigenous Feminism section had a grammatical error and stated "They do not little to no political representation..." so make sure to correct that easy fix.

3. I think the main things that need to be focused on are neutral language and including more citations.

4. This article has given me a lot of ideas for sections that I could possibly add to my article. Dgenners (talk) 15:22, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

Dgenners, thank you for reading it in the first place! Absolutely, I need to portray a more neutral tone. Reading it again after the peer review it is somewhat argumentative and it needs to be more neutral. Also, I had all my citations just never added them so I will be extremely careful when posting again what I have said and how I will cite them in the future. Also, thank you for letting me know I need to be specific on setbacks and not just generalize them so I can show in depth struggles of women in Latin America. Also I appreciate you letting me know I need to add more context than just assuming it is "today" since the feminism in Latin America evolves everyday, thank you!

First Edits

I should mention that I am unable to find your draft in your Sandbox, so while I can edit the article as it currently is, I do not specifically know which parts you have written or edited. I looked at the sources you cited in your bibliography and found that they roughly corresponded to the sections "Revolutionary/Feminist Mobilization," "Issues on Agenda," and "Latin American Feminist Theory," so I will give you feedback on those three sections.

First, I think the lead that was already completed is incredibly well-written and cited, so I don't see any need for you to edit extensively there. I also want to commend you for your professional and neutral style of writing and for your references, which all seem to be reputable and diverse. My two primary critiques are citations and ensuring that you are providing sufficient information and context about the facts you provide. For instance, the section "Revolutionary/Feminist Mobilization" is a bit vague to me. First, it may be good to give some general information about who Julie Shayne so that readers know why she is qualified to give input on the feminist movement in Latin America; it may help readers if you can clarify why Latin American feminism is revolutionary, and what that means, rather than just stating that it is. Another place to include more detail would be in the "Issues on Agenda" section, where you name the three main streams of post-suffrage, Latin-american feminism. They are fairly broad terms, so it would be helpful to explain what those terms mean and why they are significant. Overall, it is important to include enough information that readers can gain a clear picture of what you are describing, and there are a lot of good places where you can go back in and find information and references that help explain terms that you mention.

Secondly, I think you cited your own sections quite well, but in editing the article as a whole, it would be important to find citations for sections that have very few, if any. You are fortunate in that you are adding to an already extensive article, so improving the information and citations that are already available are important to the overall quality of the article. I noticed several paragraphs that had only one citation at the end and even paragraphs, such as the section "Indigenous Feminism in Latin America," that have no citations whatsoever. Overall, well done, good, professional content, just be sure to continue adding and citing!

Grace Elliott (talk) 00:25, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

Grace Elliott, thank you for reviewing my article. I realized that I made it a little complicated when setting my article and did not put in my sandbox appropriately so I apologize for that! Thank you for letting me know that Feminism in lLatin America (article) has already covered some issues that I am looking to write about. Thank you, I will use a more neutral tone! I guess the lack of sources I have used and my lack of statistics have made it seem like an argumentative paper. Thank you for seeing that. I will cite my sources soon, thank you!