User:Yesenia23pinon/Ancestral land conflict in Botswana/Taram21 Peer Review

Peer review
This is where you will complete your peer review exercise. Please use the following template to fill out your review.


 * Whose work are you reviewing? Yesenia23pinon
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: User:Yesenia23pinon/sandbox

I liked what you've added to your article Yesenia! I just have a few comments:

The lead isn't updated yet, but I assume that would happen once the other sections are complete. It is concise and has a nice summary of the history of the San people's relationship with the government. However, I think the introductory sentence could be shortened or split into two. Additionally, the introductory sentence could talk about the conflict aspect of San-government relations (right now, it talks about the initial peaceful relations but not what followed). Overall, I found the lead to be effective but it could potentially be shortened.

Since you're building on an existing article, the information added is up-to-date based on the historical gaps you're trying to fill. Everything added is relevant. Nothing is included that is missing or that does not belong — the information added runs in chronological order, making it easy to read.

The tone used is neutral and unbiased. No viewpoints seem to be under or overrepresented. You address both the government's point of view and the San people's experience, particularly by adding the section at the end on "First People of the Kalahari."

The sources are relatively current and sourced from reliable journals. From my perspective, the sources look thorough and comprehensive in their treatment of the conflict. The only thing I would underline for sources is to add one more to reach the minimum number of sources required, but I assume that will happen as you add to your section on the diamond and land conflict.

The content is well-written and well-organized, fitting well into the existing structure. I have a couple of highlights:

- "blocked the possibilities of an expansion" could be written as "blocked the possibility"

- "no concrete actions were exerted" could become "no concrete actions were taken"

Overall, I felt like your sections and content filled in missing categories to the existing article very well. On the Wikipedia page about the San people, the section on ancestral land rights in Botswana included this link talking about methods of forced relocation which might be useful: http://unsr.jamesanaya.org/docs/countries/2010_report_botswana_en.pdf. Its heavily cited in the original article, but perhaps it might have some information for your new sections. All the best for your final draft!