User:TianYun Yuan/Ahtahkakoop Cree Nation/Yasmin9901 Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Tian Yun Yuan


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:TianYun%20Yuan/Ahtahkakoop_Cree_Nation?veaction=edit&preload=Template%3ADashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Ahtahkakoop Cree Nation
 * Ahtahkakoop Cree Nation

Evaluate the drafted changes
Lead: I don't know that you have to delete and rephrase the original lead, I would recommend adding more to that section after you write the body of the article, so that you know all the main points to highlight in the lead. Also for your second sentence, as the reader I would like to know more about what claim they made.

History: This section is good, there are only a few points I would rephrase. When you refer to the chief as "legendary", I think that can be true but you should state who said it or why that became the way people described him, or say "he was well known because...". This will help avoid biased or kind of descriptive wording. The sentence starting "The promised future...", I believe while it is accurate to your research, the language could be a bit more concise and illustrate cause and effect. For example, "the settlers (or government) promised x,y, and z to the Ahtahkahoop through treaties (or verbal contracts) but because of (reason) this didn't happen. Overall just look out for being too descriptive when it comes to how bad or good conditions were. Good job on the information and I learned some new facts!

News: I think for this section I get where you're going with it, but I would suggest adding why these modern day news stories are important or link to how they were treated in their history. This would also be a good place to add what the "Ahtahkakoop Cree Nation Treaty Land Entitlement Claim" is.

Recap: I think that so far you are making good headway and as the reader I can understand more of the history of the Ahtahkahoop Cree Nation. All of your links work, and I believe they are all reliable sources. I would work on adding more context and rephrasing a few areas, but other than that I think it's looking good.