# Talk:India Juliana

This review is transcluded from Talk:India Juliana/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: An anonymous username, not my real name (talk · contribs) 23:03, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

I would be happy to review this. I will list every critique I can think of. --An anonymous username, not my real name (talk) 23:03, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

Awesome!--🩸 𝗕𝗹𝗲𝗳𝗳 🩸  (talk) 23:10, 11 February 2022 (UTC)


### Review
Very good already. The only things I would change:

Remove the extra background information from the lead. It would help if it focused only on the basics of her life and historical significance.
Done
The term cacique is used multiple times but never defined.
Done
Some of the Later versions should be moved into a new section. The new section should focus on later analysis by historians, while Later versions would have versions of the original story created by non-experts.
Done
Legacy should contain an image.
Done
Note: I may also use a non-free image rationale like this one or this one. What do you think would be better?
I think that's all it needs, but I want to be sure. Once these are all fixed I may just pass it, or, if I notice anything, add more recommendations to this page. Excellent work so far! --An anonymous username, not my real name (talk) 23:20, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
Hello, @Bleff:, just letting you know that the review has been here for a couple of days, since you seem to have not noticed it. --An anonymous username, not my real name (talk) 23:47, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

Hi! You're right, I hadn't noticed. Taking care of the corrections right now. --🩸 𝗕𝗹𝗲𝗳𝗳 🩸  (talk) 13:36, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
Hello @An anonymous username, not my real name:. Thank you for the review and your nice comments! I just took care of the corrections. Let me know what you think. All the best, --🩸 𝗕𝗹𝗲𝗳𝗳 🩸  (talk) 14:19, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
Sorry for the delay, but your good article nomination has been passed! Congratulations! I think a fact from this page would make a nice DYK. --An anonymous username, not my real name (talk) 02:17, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

In the lede it is stated that "Since the area was not rich in minerals as they had anticipated, the colonists generated wealth through the enslavement and forced labor of indigenous people—especially the sexual exploitation of women of childbearing age." which gives the impression that Spaniards settled (or remained in) Paraguay to generate wealth through sexual exploitation. This certainly sounds bizarre. How do settlers in an isolated colony with almost no external trade generate wealth through sexual exploitation? Lulicoxi (talk) 08:20, 12 November 2024 (UTC)