Talk:Nina Gualinga

Neutrality and point of view concerns
The article has a very promotional tone and appears to be written from the point of view of the subject of the article and to lack balance. For example, the phrase "...she developed her own non-governmental organization to empower indigenous Sarayaku’s youth and women and to protect the Southern Ecuadorian Amazon." is not neutral. It reads as if it was copied from a press release from the organization and that it is intended to reflect positively on Gualinga. A more neutral tone would use a third party reliable source and stick to citable facts. For example, "the organization she founded has a membership of 3,000 as of 2020,[1] and has received positive feedback from the Ecuadorian government on its contribution to youth education in the country.[2]" Similarly, the article takes a one-sided view of her contribution. What do the companies and other interests who she opposes have to say about her? E.g., "Gualinga claims that the forests are being destroyed by corporate interests, but the largest oil company operating in the region disputes this view." QuiteUnusual (talk) 15:38, 11 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Hm, "...she developed her own non-governmental organization to empower indigenous Sarayaku’s youth and women and to protect the Southern Ecuadorian Amazon." seems neutral to me if empowering and protecting was why she did it (and there are good sources backing it, which on the other hand seems to be a bit thin). That's not only a factual statement, but also gives the reader an insight to what motivates Gualinga. But I agree that the there are more to cover. Ainali (talk) 16:45, 11 November 2020 (UTC)
 * I am very confused by these tags, reading the whole article: I can't find anything that appears not from multiple perspectives/approaches. The very nature of climate and indigenous activists is that they have little additional coverage or critique: their voices are so underrepresented, that their particular opinions rarely are in dispute, but rather just neglected -- you would need evidence that there "are significant other opinions" to challenge the other positions -- it would be very different this article were clearly about something that is likely to have multiple perspective out in the world, Sadads (talk) 17:08, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

Grandmother: Cristina Gualinga, Corina Montalvo, or both?
This edit changed grandma's name to Corina Montalvo, but the link doesn't support that Corina is in fact Nina'a grandmother. Can anyone find some other corroboration? I'm going to put it back to Cristina Gualinga for now, since sources actually exist that connect Cristina Gualinga to Nina and the rest of the Gualinga family. – Anon423 (talk) 06:22, 10 December 2022 (UTC)