My peer reviewer mentioned a few things about my sources which I think are incredibly important. Dr. Holt noted that two of my sources are not very scholarly though they have interesting information. My peer reviewer pointed out that my sources may be biased in some respects so I have to make sure to leave that out of my article, and I have to make sure I represent all viewpoints. Also, because my peer reviewer admitted that she didn’t know much about the DSL, I think it will be important for me to make sure the people reading my article know what I am talking about. I think that if I make sure my introductory paragraph is solid, readers will understand what I’m talking about, so I’ll be sure to make my introductory paragraph at the beginning of the article informative and easy to understand. Lastly, my peer reviewer noted that because I am working on a brand new article as opposed to a preexisting one, I need to be sure to stay on topic, because I have so much freedom with what I can write. I will be sure to keep this in mind as I write my article. I found my peer reviewers comments to be beneficial and practical.

I’d thank to thank my peer reviewer for their feedback. I only had one peer review and many of their comments were about my writing style. I will improve my grammar and sentence phrasing to make it easy to read. Another comment they had was to explain key words like Fair Trade. Fair Trade is a bit complicated, so I will not explain Fair Trade in its entirety, but I will include a wiki-link to its page. Overall, I will improve the readability of my section of the article and include the wiki-links to any important words or organizations. Thank you peer reviewer!

     First, I want to thank my peer reviewer! I really appreciate you taking the time to read my ideas on improving the article and giving me feedback for it. The person who reviewed my ideas of improvement agreed that adding to how society impacts the way women dress and the textiles they produce is important to add. I think by doing this I can address the different meanings behind the patterns and embroideries of certain clothing pieces such as the huipil (only briefly mentioned in the article) as my peer reviewer suggested. While brainstorming of things to add to the article, I did feel like I had hit a sort of roadblock of things to add which is why I appreciate the suggestion to add to the introduction/overview section of the article. Looking back at the article now, I completely agree. The overview section is incredibly underdeveloped in this article and I think I can add a lot to it. I can use this section to provide historical context and introduce the audience to evidence that’ll help them answer the question of “Why does this article even matter?”. Lastly, thank you so much to my peer reviewer for reminding me of the picture idea! You’re so right, I do actually have a hooded jacket that I brought back from Latin America that would work well with this project and the article. This suggestion also reminded me of a lot of other things I brought back that could possibly work in these projects! I’m going to try to get someone from home to text me a picture of them!       

The additions that I will make to my Wikipedia article are central around the success of the brand, Havaianas. As a result, both of my peer reviewers suggested that it may be difficult to remain neutral when discussing the impact of this brand because I do not want to try to persuade readers for why the brand is so successful. Essentially, I need to show the methods and techniques that were utilized by the brand from a marketing perspective. It was recommended that I gather as many statistics as I can and try to provide charts and tables that further demonstrate the brand’s impact on the world. I do not know whether it will be feasible to add charts and graphs since I do not own the rights to them, but I can use the information supplied by the graphs and cite it as a source. This brings me to the next point that both of my peer reviewers made, which is to cite heavily. More citations yield greater credibility. Additionally, both of my peer reviewers agreed with me that there is an evident content gap in my article and my plan will improve it substantially. However, I was also asked about how I plan to place my research in the article, which provoked me to think about the organizational structure that I will incorporate into my article and the different sections that I will name. All of their suggestions were really beneficial and have caused me to think about my additions in multiple ways. Thanks peer reviewers!

First, Thank you to People who commented on my talk page.

They said that since the topic is very interesting and less known, I should add some information why the monks chose to renovate La Cathedral. Thus, I will incorporate the reason for the renovation in my talk page. And in terms of the sequencing the sections, I will fix that in order to fit the flow of the passage. And I will paraphrase the direct quote that I have used in order to prevent the plagiarism. However, speaking of the sources for the article, It is difficult to find more sources for the article since the topic is indeed a narrowly focused topic and even though it’s been presented in some of the books or journals, still, only a small number of words have been given for the description of La Catedral. Most resources that I could find is through the periodicals.  In addition, I intend to add a section that mainly addresses how people have dug deep inside the prison to find the hidden money Pablo Escobar has buried underground. It would be an interesting fact to add to the passage.

The people who commented on my Wikipedia plans suggested that I add pictures and replace bad sources. They also warned me to remain unbiased because my topic can quickly become biased. As far as pictures go, I will look for good pictures of my topic but I am not sure that they will be available. I will try to at least incorporate a picture of the Autodefensa symbol which is a white dove. In terms of replacing bad sources, I will see what kind of overlap my sources have with the bad ones. If there is overlap I will absolutely replace those sources with better ones. If there is no overlap, I will do some research however it can be hard to find good information on my topic. It seems like the person who wrote my article originally had a lot of knowledge of Autodefensas groups in Mexico before they did any research and just tried to find a few sources to back up what they knew. Hopefully I will be able to find better ones that serve the same purpose. Finally, I will be sure to remain unbiased. This will be hard considering the topic however I think it will be doable as long as I stick to factual information and am very careful with my word choice. For example I will say that some Autodefensas groups began to sell drugs to finance their organization however I will not compare this to cartel activity even though it is similar. If I made that comparison I may be forcing my own conclusions on my readers which is not allowed on Wikipedia. I got a lot of good feedback so now I just have to get started!

     In the United States, Latinos were stereotyped as “hypersexual party people”. They were seen as “hot tamales” for the way citizens of the United States perceived their music videos and themes in their songs. However, Rivera-Rideau’s argues that if these Latino songwriters and performers could “pass” as being white, they had a chance at being assimilated into the mainstream music industry of the United States. Rivera—Rideau argues, while illustrating through the usage of a spectrum, that these Latino music artists are racialized, essentially being labeled, categorized and compared relative to White Americans and African Americans, to promote the style of music throughout the industry.

     The chapter mentions that Reggaetón does have many similarities to music produced by Black Americans, however, when the genre was introduced to the United States it was labeled as “Hurban” or “Hispanic Urban” to primarily attract the Latino Americans that resided in the states to the style of music. By labeling the genre “Hurban” the genre had the opportunity to flourish in the United States because it was initially targeted to a community that could more easily relate to the style and its themes. I’m sure this was a marking ploy created so that once the music became popular in highly concentrated latino regions of the U.S., the musical genre would spread to other cultures and regions ultimately making more money while appearing to assimilate the culture. Throughout the chapter, I noticed that it seemed that Rivera—Rideau argued in the United States we tend to group the latino genre differently depending on how we care to view the culture in a specific circumstance. Rivera—Rideau states that “this Hurban category linked Latinidad and blackness via stereotypes associated with poor, urban black and Latino communities while simultaneously maintaining the rigid separation between the two categories in the U.S. racial lexicon;” this sentiment ultimately shows that we acknowledge the stereotypes that say these minorities belong to a lower class but we should keep them separate probably to appeal to the Latino community.