User:1326mmb/Chokwe people/RyeNicole Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

(provide username) User:132mmb


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:1326mmb/Chokwe_people?preload=Template%3ADashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template#cite_note-:0-22
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Chokwe people
 * Chokwe people

Evaluate the drafted changes
(Compose a detailed peer review here, considering each of the key aspects listed above if it is relevant. Consider the guiding questions, and check out the examples of what feedback looks like.)

You added a lot of information that I found was interesting to read about, specifically referring to the ritual masks. It was great that you explained that there are three different categories that each mask is placed in. With that being said, I see that you reiterated the first category of the cikungu or mukishi wa mwanangana mask in its own separate paragraph. But when it came you the Cimyanji, Pwo, or Mwana Pwo masks I as the reader has to assume which of the three categories they were placed in. Therefore, in the beginning of those last two paragraphs, I'd suggest restating that those masks fall under the category of mukishi a kuhangana (dance masks).

I also noticed that your first paragraph under your "Rituals" header was worded too similarly to your source, the article "Ritual Masks of the Chokwe" by Marie Louise-Bastin. My suggestion to refrain from paraphrasing the article would be to think about Chokwe rituals in your own words. Rather than trying to change the wording sentence by sentence, read the entire section and then describe the actions based on your own understanding.

Another thing I observed as I read the information that you added to the Chokwe article is you have a lot of run on sentences. Instead of using a lot of commas to continue one sentence, try breaking them up into shorter complete sentences with periods at the end. You have added a lot of valuable details to this article, but it gets a little hard to read when it is not broken up properly.

Looking at the lead paragraph, I see no changes have been made. It is quite short and does not state any of the main sections that will be introduced in this article. The only things mentioned are where the Chokwe people are found and the other names they go by. If you are able to find any information pertaining to where exactly the other names for the Chokwe people came from (the origin) then that could add some depth. As well as including your main sections that are currently in the article and the ones you added pertaining to rituals and restitution.

The content that you added is indeed relevant to the Chokwe people. Most of the information you added came from the "Ritual Masks of the Chokwe" by Marie Louise-Bastin published in August of 1984, so it is up to date. I saw that you added a few brief sentences towards the end of the history section, which is quite relevant. However, you pushed down the sentence about the prince of Mbunda and it looks a bit out of place because no further information has been added discussing the prince. If you can't find any details on that specific prince to fill in the missing gaps, I'd delete that little sentence.

All the content you have added to this article has a neutral tone. I think you did a nice job on making sure that you didn't use any biased language in your "Restitution" section. Although, you do need to be more specific in regards to the content you are presenting. For example, you mention six objects of the Chokwe in glass cases. Where is this art on display? You then went on to say that there were six objects returned to the museum. And in the next sentence it states that only eleven out of sixty objects have been returned. It would help the readers understand a lot more if you explained if the six objects were included in the eleven. Also more context is need because where did the other 5 objects come from to get the number eleven? Overall, I'd like to see this "Restitution" section be elaborated on a lot more.

The sources you have added do seem to be thorough and and current. One thing I noticed when I clicked on source #23 Hersak, Dung. "Restitution: Debate and Action" the link went to an error page saying it couldn't be found. Maybe you could try edited the link so the pages of the article can be accessed. Another thing I see is that the original article started off with 21 sources and you now have 25, so you it seems as if added four. But I noticed the reference #1 and #18 are blank. So if you could delete those to get an accurate number that would be helpful.

When it is time to do so, I think adding better captions to the images that are already there would be useful. Instead of just labeling the objects as crafts, individually state what they are with the title/description if available.

Overall, the content that you have added has definitely improved the article. I think it was a great decision for you to add an "Artwork" section since it wasn't already included. I'd like to see you explain some of the artworks in the margin in this section so readers can get a better understand of how they relate to the Chokwe culture. You also got a great start on the "Restitution" subsection, if you keep adding on to that it will become a prominent part of the the article. As it is important that we know who has possession of the cultures artwork.