User talk:Aleo1200

Welcome!
Hello, Aleo1200, and welcome to Wikipedia! My name is Shalor and I work with the Wiki Education Foundation; I help support students who are editing as part of a class assignment.

I hope you enjoy editing here. If you haven't already done so, please check out the student training library, which introduces you to editing and Wikipedia's core principles. You may also want to check out the Teahouse, a community of Wikipedia editors dedicated to helping new users. Below are some resources to help you get started editing. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 19:03, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

Chantico Article Evaluation
Paragraph 1: Good at being concise. However, these three sentences are a bit scattered. Maybe add some transition sentences between these main ideas to provide some context to the reader (specifically the middle sentence, and do not forget to cite it).

Also, evaluate the use of the word "mythology" like we talked about in class.

Paragraph 2 - etymology: great use of a primary text and citing your ideas! You need to add a period after the first sentence. Good neutral tone.

Paragraph 3-myth: another great use of primary source and hyperlinking it. Hyperlinking Tonacatecuhtli might be helpful for context to the reader. "leading her to gain the name . . ." is a bit awkward to read, maybe reword this phrase. Additionally, hyperlinking to an article about the aztec calendar and how it works might also be helpful context to the reader.

Paragraph 4 - History: I believe this section needs some citation to where you gathered this information. Good job hyperlinking the Templo Mayor and Bernardino de Sahagún.

Paragraph 5 - Iconography: Good descriptions. A photo associated with this section might help the reader envision your descriptions. Good job staying in neutral tone.

Paragraph 6 - Debates: Good use of the word "deity" to avoid implying the wrong gender. This is an interesting debate, it was a great idea to include this in your article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jennavdg (talk • contribs) 01:43, 9 October 2018 (UTC)

Peer Review
This is a great article. It is well writ and easy to understand. A few highlights:

Nice organization. 6 different sections with little repetition. The only changes I would make would be to consider combining "History" and "Origin Narrative" for simplicity.

Additionally, despite your inclusion of a gallery at the end, I would consider embedding additional images into the page. This is just stylistic preference.

Overall, nice job.

NickHelfand (talk) 17:59, 15 October 2018 (UTC)