Talk:Gender inequality in Bolivia

Excellent article

Thank you for adding this article. It is quite comprehensive and addresses important issues about Bolivia's indigenous population. Nice balance of broad information and detailed context. Citations may be needed for some of the examples of gender stereotypes, but overall seem good. One suggestion is to consider how you use term misogynistic in the lead paragraph (first sentence). Since misogyny is the hatred or dislike of women, you may want to explain further or find a better adjective. Your descriptions of the Aymara people seems quite accurate based on my experience living with them. One trend I noticed while living there was the migration of men from the rural areas to the cities, leaving the women and families behind. You touch on this indirectly, but seemed to be a significant problem in rural areas.Weetie22 (talk) 03:01, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Response: Thank you for your advice. I used a different word instead of misogyny.Tawneefranc (talk) 15:40, 28 April 2014 (UTC)talk

Review

I thought the article was good, but there some issues with the lead paragraph. The lead paragraph did not make sense in some areas, especially concerning health care. I deleted the sentence and just put there was limited access to healthcare, but you may want to fix this. I tried to fix some of the sentencing issues throughout the rest of the paper, but again you may want to check for flow in the article and that sentences make sense. The only other issue I found was that the labor market section stated that because women have less participation in the labor market, they are less able to get an education. I think this is suppose to be the other way around. Less education should mean less market participation due to illiteracy (I could be wrong). You may want to just expand on or explain this. Otherwise, the article looks good and you have done a good job. Jaccarlton (talk) 18:58, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

Response: Thank you for your comments. I corrected a sentence with the phrase, little access to limited access. Also, I switched participation in the labor market phrase around like you said because I agree that it makes more sense.Tawneefranc (talk) 15:51, 28 April 2014 (UTC) talk — Preceding undated comment added 15:44, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

Feedback

I agree that this is a really great article! Very informative. Did you create it or add to it? I have a few very minor suggestions. I would work on the wording and grammar. There were some confusing sentences I found throughout the piece that could easily be simplified. There were also several grammatical mistakes that are also an easy fix. One particular suggestion I have is moving the subsection where you talk about young girls having to help with the domestic work to the "Labor" section and then maybe also discussing how the socialization/expectation is different for young boys. Also, I think it would make sense to change the title of the "Labor" section to something like "Economic Participation" or something and then include the info about property rights there so that is more cohesive and looks more complete. Ahellebuick (talk) 00:22, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Response: Thank you for your comments. I changed Labor to Economic participation and fixed some grammatical errors.Tawneefranc (talk) 15:51, 28 April 2014 (UTC)talk

More feedback

You have expanded the article since the first version to make it more comprehensive, so that is good. But I agree that the new text you added to the article needs to be improved for grammar and clarity. I hope you will be able to do this before finalizing your contribution. There are many awkward sentence structures. For example, "Majority of Bolivia has many workers migrating to other countries due to the neoliberal regime." I think you mean: "Most of the migration out of Bolivia has been attributed to the economic pressures due to the neoliberal regime." Then add a citation at the end of that sentence. Also, "Although migration takes place between Latin American countries. Many women migrate..." change period to comma. In addition, the "Labor market" section has only one citation that supports it and that dates from 2000. You cite the HDR 2012 but for average years of schooling, when GII Table 4 has the latest LFPRs for women and men, which you can incorporate. Also, the impact of lack of Spanish skills takes up too much space in the article (a bit repetitive). And it is "Robeyns's" not "Robeyn's." Be sure all key idea statements are supported with a citation, and add some more links. BerikG (talk) 05:59, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

Resonse: Thank you for your comments. I changed the two sentences you mentioned in your feedback. I also added the GII information for inequality-adjusted income index. and added the citation after the neoliberal regime sentence. I deleted some paragraphs of the lack of Spanish skills and added more links.Tawneefranc (talk) 15:54, 28 April 2014 (UTC)talk

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Gender inequality in Bolivia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150402163658/http://www.paho.org/hq/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=8175:violence-against-women-latin-america-caribbean-comparative-analysis-population-data-from-12-countries&Itemid=1519&lang=en to http://www.paho.org/hq/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=8175:violence-against-women-latin-america-caribbean-comparative-analysis-population-data-from-12-countries&Itemid=1519&lang=en
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120302210650/http://www.madre.org/index/meet-madre-1/our-projects-20/bolivia-demanding-a-political-voice-for-women-147.html to http://www.madre.org/index/meet-madre-1/our-projects-20/bolivia-demanding-a-political-voice-for-women-147.html
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://ipsnews.zippykid.it/2010/01/bolivia-more-women-in-parliament-with-their-own-agenda/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:48, 8 January 2017 (UTC)