User:Wyogirl1/Lourdes Huanca Atencio/Hansikanath Peer Review

General info
Wyogirl1
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Wyogirl1/Lourdes_Huanca_Atencio/Hansikanath_Peer_Review?veaction=edit&preload=Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org_peer_review
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Lourdes_Huanca_Atencio.jpg
 * https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Lourdes_Huanca_Atencio.jpg

Evaluate the drafted changes
Lead:

- The introductory sentence covers the content adequately and has been updated well. I noticed there are huge abbreviations. I would recommend double checking if it is necessary to put them in brackets because it looks slightly confusing and is difficult to follow when reading. There is no introduction to the brief sections of the other parts of the article but can be added in easily. There is some mention of activism but early life is missing. The lead it concise but overly details a lot of organizations and abbreviations.

Content: The content additions seem relevant and up to date. There is a good use of time frames. It also addresses indigenous populations and therefore covers the equity gap required by Wikipedia. I would recommend adding in more sources because there are many lines that are still missing sources.

Tone and Balance: The tone was the main factor that seemed like an issue to me because I noticed the language, although not exactly biased, is very suggestive. It doesn't explicitly insinuate but does have some sort of convincingness to it and it is evident that the writer has an opinion. From what I understood, the article has to be absolutely neutral. I would recommend re-reading the article and picking different words. I'll explain what I'm trying to say with the example - "They are living in desperate times which causes them to argue and fight over things such as money which is why the country is so divided"

The word desperate is descriptive and has a very strong meaning. The sentence then makes a causal relationship between arguments and desperate times. There is a general claim that people fight over money and so the country is divided. If Lordes Huanca has not said these words in this exact manner, these are all generalized, large assumptions that cannot be inserted into a Wikipedia page, in my opinion. Most of the article is written this way.

Sources and References: There is a wide variety of sources but I believe there is scope for more to be added in. There many sweeping statements, such as the one above, that do not have any sources backing them. The links given work.

Organization: The organization is alright but I think the activism section has the potential to be divided into sub-sections. There is some difficulty in following the article and it definitely loses flow in certain places. Reshuffling some sentences, particularly the activism section would be a great idea.

Images and Media:

There is one image. I do believe the image can be laid out in a more visually appealing way, potentially bigger. New images can be added regarding the activism to make it more interesting.

Overall Impressions:

The article is great, I love the topic and appreciate the depth of research. It just requires some fine touches and should be good. I hope the peer review helps and best of luck!