User:Ellfuentes/María Talavera Broussé/JacobChagoya Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

EllFuentes


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * Sandbox Draft


 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Does not exist

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.)


 * 1) First, what does the article do well? Is there anything from your review that impressed you? Any turn of phrase that described the subject in a clear way?

The article does a good job of giving a general overview of Talavera Broussé's life, as I got a general sense of her work as an activist. It also does a good job of detailing the different political organizations she was involved in, listing them in a way that is easy to follow for the reader. I also think that the headings, once filled out, will be very useful for the reader, as they help organize the information and Talavera Broussé's life and career work.

'''2. What changes would you suggest the author apply to the article? Why would those changes be an improvement?'''

I would definitely be interested to know what you classify her early life as. Perhaps a date range of years or range of ages (for example, till she was 22) could help the readers orient themselves to the events that happened in her early life. For example, when was her daughter born? When did she become romantically involved with Ricardo Flores Magón? I believe this would improve the article to help readers grasp the timeline of her life a bit better.

Another change that I would suggest is consistency with her last name. In certain moments you refer to her as Talavera Broussé, but in other sentences you call her just Broussé. I believe some consistency will help clarify to the readers how she should be referred to. Perhaps the sources you draw information from could indicate what is appropriate; if not, you could probably decide which one you want to pick.

3. What's the most important thing the author could do to improve the article?

I believe the most important thing the author could do is to ensure that they include citations. I'm sure you will add them later but I just want to reiterate the importance of including the citations, as it will help give you legitimacy. This legitimacy is especially needed in the line "one can assume that Broussé's family was seeking to escape the dictatorship of Mexican President Porfirio Díaz, who served between the years 1877-1911." An assumption here may make the reader skeptical of the information provided, as evidence is needed to substantiate this claim.

4. Did you notice anything about the article you reviewed that could be applicable to your own article?

I mentioned this earlier, but I would definitely say the way you clearly lay out the different organizations that Talavera Broussé worked for and was involved in. I am writing about Jesús Colón and he was also involved in many different organizations and wrote for a lot of newspapers, so organizing all of his different memberships is challenging.