Talk:Hortensia Amaro

Add in lead more on latino/women/minority demographic that she servedMyFactsMatter2017 (talk) 19:39, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

Peer Review
Your lead is really well-written! All of the information is relevant. I think the wording of the first sentence might be a little too close to that of the source you used, though. The only other real problem I can see is that the last sentence might be a little confusing. (Also, source 2 is cited twice as [2] and [3], when both citations could be under [2], but I don't think that's a big deal.)

I think talking about her education would definitely be beneficial, but I see that you have an "academics" section, so I assume you were already planning to do that. If you could add more info on her career, I think that would be valuable, as well. Some of the things you brought up in the lead sound really interesting, so maybe you could expand on those?

In terms of your sources, they do appear credible, but perhaps there is a better way of citing these specifically (since the citations don't really say anything about the source itself): "Prabook | Login". prabook.com. Retrieved 2017-11-26., "Search Results". www.apha.org. Retrieved 2017-11-26.

Great job overall!!

Sydkei (talk) 19:57, 27 November 2017 (UTC)