User:Jslfriedman/Indigenous decolonization/Saxophonic and Smooth Peer Review

Article: Indigenous decolonization

Joey,

Overall I appreciate the contributions you've made. You've added clear and concise contributions under organized and helpful captions. There are some grammatical issues that can easily be addressed. One piece of advice I have for you is getting a bit more specific in the first two areas of your "Methods" section.

Under your first section, "Indigenous Postcolonial Theory," you mention eradicating power imbalances—what power imbalances, specifically? I'd encourage just a brief phrase of what you mean here, though you don't need to go into much detail. It could be helpful for the reader. Additionally, when you say IPT was developed to center indigenous knowledge and values inclusively, I wonder, how does it do this? It might be worth a sentence or two to explain this. I also wonder what you mean by the phrase "intricacies of colonization."

Under your second section, "Survivance, Sovereignty, and Rhetorical Sovereignty," there are some grammatical issues, as in the first section, though you can easily spot these with a close read. I also wonder if you would want to move the citation to the first sentence, since that's where you first mention the idea. This section works well, and you hold your argument strong, but you include a new idea—rhetorical control—without explaining what it means at the end. I wonder if there's a way for you to briefly elaborate what it means?

When you are writing under "Narrative, counter-storytelling, and testimonies," you explain each brief subsection succinctly and with great control, though I wonder if you could speak to this section's overall significance—why, that is, these topics matter for the overall Wikipedia page/theme of indigenous decolonization. Each section's importance is implicit, so perhaps I'm wrong here and you can ignore my suggestion, but I'm wondering if you might want to make it more explicit.

Thank you for letting me read!

Max