User talk:Peterpietri/Nacotchtank
Peer Review
[edit]This expansion looks very good overall. I'm assuming that some of the existing material in Nacotchtank will be retained, perhaps by incorporation of "Villages" into your geography section. Some thoughts and suggested edits:
- Cut this: "This article refers to the Nacotchtank as an ethnic group, tribe, or nation."
- "anglicized version": your source says it was a Latin version of the name.
- History headings: use a comma or parentheses, but not both.
- Conceptual question: When a tribal community flees and merges with another closely related one, I don't think "extinction" and its cognates is the right word. Absorbed, coalesced, joined, immigrated, or sought refuge seem more appropriate? What proof do we have that the Nacotchtank ever regarded them as ethnically distinct to the Piscataway and therefore they "lost their tribal identity"? That their language was distinct and therefore "lost"? If there isn't evidence, these terms are not justified.
- I'm not sure what this uncited sentence means: "The population on this island, now much smaller than the original Nacotchtank population, was very weak and incoherent."
- I don't think "The Generall Historie…" is a novel.
- When you introduce the Patawomeke, describe where they live and the language they speak.
- Try to short indirect wording like "served to severely weaken." In that case "severely weakened" is fine.
- There seems to be an excessive number of <weakness adjective> Nacotchtank references here. Just tell the story.
There is so much really great information here. Thanks for a really interesting article.--Carwil (talk) 17:43, 29 October 2020 (UTC)