User:Jaypanda95/Khao Sam Kaeo/Eriebe2 Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Jaypanda95, Julie Foss, MKnightingale


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Jaypanda95/Khao_Sam_Kaeo?veaction=edit&preload=Template%3ADashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template


 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * https://la.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khao_Sam_Kaeo

Evaluate the drafted changes
Introduction - I was really impressed with the amount of info in the introduction and article in general! I like that you made a good use of connecting important pieces of info to other Wikipedia sites such as the Thai-Malay Peninsula location, and I appreciate how much you discussed the major evidence found to prove Khao Sam Kaeo was an important trading site for Southeast Asia to South Asia and China. What I would add on would just maybe be to mention the location of the site in the first sentence and possibly contribute other broad aspects of the site other than how it was a big maritime trade site. I'm also wondering if there is any info on the ethnic or cultural group who occupied the site in pre-historic or historical records? Just wondering because that is what most of my articles on my site focused on, didn't know if it's different for other sites. But it was very well written and well cited!

Trade/Metallurgy/Glass Technology - I liked the additional info of the cultural influences being strategically developed over time, proving that the site wasn't passive in foreign cultural influence through trade, but had their own unique characteristics that blended with other cultures subtly through time. The detail of how beads were evidence of the site being huge in trade and foreign influence was super helpful to the article, especially adding how the importance of beads were to the people occupying the site culturally; this info makes me want to add a section like this to my site and how in specific ways cultural goods were valuable and maybe used at my site. One thing I may add to the article overall is to check grammar? Not even that bad though, just super minor mistakes because it's overall very well written! The Metallurgy section was also well written, and you provided a nice, well-detailed description of how metals (raw materials and specific tools) reflected foreign influence. Again, I would ask specifically about the people who occupied this site -- who they were, social positions, how they used tools and what tools they had, if all of these precious metals, tools, and jewelry were used ritually such as in grave burials or were used as wealth and status? The Glass Technology was also nicely detailed with a good amount of info such as the evidence that most raw material was imported, and the people who occupied the site weren't really locally producing anything, attesting to the theory that they were mainly middle-men in maritime trade.

Overall remarks - You provided a great amount of information on the topics provided and it was all well-written and well-sourced! I liked that you utilized the tool of linking to other Wikipedia sites; that's something I need to do more of and it helps with the validity of the article. I would say that the fact that the site was a major trading port may have been too repeated and focused on throughout the article? And that there's some info in the Metallurgy and Glass Technology section that could be condensed because the evidence of it being a trading site with foreign influence is already well stated in the intro and Trade section.