User:Obergj/Nazca culture/R. Culverwell Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Obergj


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Nazca_culture&oldid=1070363686
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Nazca_culture&oldid=1070363686
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Nazca_culture&oldid=1070363686

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.)

I should say that I didn't previously know much about the Nazca culture beyond the Nazca lines, but this seems like an interesting topic. It looks like you haven't made many substantial changes yet, but I think they're generally helpful. It was a good choice to remove the line about environmental deterioration from the "Social structure" section, which seemed speculative and poorly written. The citation you added in the "Pottery" section is also helpful. Beyond that, I'll try to offer some suggestions for future work. For one thing, I think the "History" section could use some work- the first subheading should explain why the time is divided as it is or identify some distinguishing characteristics for the time periods. Under the second subheading, about the culture's decline, it looks like all of that information came from a single source on the role of a tree species in the region's ecology. Maybe that could be incorporated into the story, but I'm sure there is scholarship from more relevant sources that's perhaps a bit less speculative. Also, I'm not sure I like the way the "History" section is divided- the "Time frame" subheading seems a bit awkward. Much of the article just seems poorly written and could benefit from being cleaned up. There are some grammatical errors- under the "Religion" heading, for instance, "Much as in the contemporary Moche culture based in northwest Peru" is written as a standalone sentence. There are also some questionable statements made- the "Trophy heads" section, for instance, starts with the statement "The debate over the purpose of trophy heads continues to this day," yet the paragraph's only source is from 2000. Whether trophy heads should be one of the three aspects of society, along with social structure and religion, is another question. --R. Culverwell (talk) 07:12, 21 February 2022 (UTC)