User:Izaahd/Mujeres Creando/Karov03 Peer Review

General info
Izaahd
 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Link to draft you're reviewing


 * User:Izaahd/Mujeres Creando
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists):

Evaluate the drafted changes

 * There is a strong opening sentence that gets straight to the point. It gives me the names and main work and goals revolve around.
 * There is enough geographic context to help me establish where these actions take place. There could be a little bit more historical context, but I feel that since you included a lot of reasoning, it helps give background information.
 * There are links to other Wikipedia pages that help the reader obtain the proper information to understand a certain section. I do not know much about this topic, so I don't know how much information is available. However, this writing does not seem very broad.
 * There does seem to be a good organization. There are only two sections, but they are laid out well. The first section gives a little bit of background and reasoning, and the second section discusses one specific event.
 * The sources seem reliable; there is a mix of what seem to be books and an article. There appear to be about three sources cited. I think it would be It would be beneficial to include a few more and, if possible, pull from different types, like news articles.
 * like mentioned above, I suggest adding a variety of sources that can help the reader get better background information.
 * It is a little difficult to decide if there is biased language. Since the description is of their artwork and its meaning, I would not assume it is biased.
 * The grammar seems to be fine. Everything seems to make sense. The language is clear. The style of the title is hard to follow, but it still makes sense.
 * The language seems clear; it is a little hard to access, but if the sources are fixed, so is that
 * There is no visual material. I would suggest either adding a picture of Julieta or Monica or their art pieces
 * My last comment is to add a few more sources of different varieties and some imagery. I would also double-check biased language, but besides that, everything seems good