CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 2

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Rethinking Latin American Archaeology: "Affective Alliances" and Traditional Community-Engagement

Sallum, Marianne·2023·Papers from the Institute of Archaeology
DOI 10.14324/111.444.2041-9015.1392
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The integration of archaeology and community engagement in Latin America remains a new challenge, largely because the multiple social configurations, practices, and theories intrinsic in each need to be considered instead of creating a unified pattern. In Brazil, there are more than 16,000 communities of Indigenous, Maroon, and traditional membership, all with many demands that test the collaborative capacity of researchers. Seeking a basis for action within a decolonization perspective, this paper provides the theoretical background that outlines some benefits of an affective alliance and collaboration based on the equivalence of knowledge and practices from different epistemes. This paper also offers regional cases of the persistence of agroforestry communities that require the re-evaluation of academic and bureaucratic erasure. On one side, the Tupi Guarani of Peruíbe that manifest interest in recovering the language and practices of their ancestors. On the other side, the persistence of social and cultural practices that started in Indigenous contexts but extended beyond them, with people from different places and times joining the communities of women potters.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.14324/111.444.2041-9015.1392

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Figure 1 Native land acknowledgements by Brazilian government (IBGE 2019 and FUNAI).
Figure 1 Native land acknowledgements by Brazilian government (IBGE 2019 and FUNAI).CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 2 Maroon's land acknowledgements by Brazilian government (IBGE 2019 and INCRA).
Figure 2 Maroon's land acknowledgements by Brazilian government (IBGE 2019 and INCRA).CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 3 A) Yanomami Community, Roraima: Photo: Renato Soares (https://www.renatosoares.com.br/); B) Area of the Ivaporunduva maroon, Vale do Ribeira. Photo: Ricardo Martinelli. Available at:
Figure 3 A) Yanomami Community, Roraima: Photo: Renato Soares (https://www.renatosoares.com.br/); B) Area of the Ivaporunduva maroon, Vale do Ribeira. Photo: Ricardo Martinelli. Available at:CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 4 A) 'Ruínas do Abarebebê' (São Paulo, Peruíbe), aerial photo by Tipuana images (Vitor Barão); B) Area of the Indigenous residence between the 17 th and 19 th centuries; C and D) Drawing by José Custodio de Sá e Faria (1776) -marked with a circle (C) are the Indigenous residence and (D) some details of size and layout of the houses (D) adapted by Carolina Guedes.
Figure 4 A) 'Ruínas do Abarebebê' (São Paulo, Peruíbe), aerial photo by Tipuana images (Vitor Barão); B) Area of the Indigenous residence between the 17 th and 19 th centuries; C and D) Drawing by José Custodio de Sá e Faria (1776) -marked with a circle (C) are the Indigenous residence and (D) some details of size and layout of the houses (D) adapted by Carolina Guedes.CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 5 Pots produced in communities of São Paulo and Paraná that share the same features as those made in several archaeological sites dated between the 16 th and 20 th centuries: a) British Museum; b, c, e, g, h, m, n, o, p, q) Collection by Herta Scheuer - Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology of the UFPR; d) Historical Museum of Itapeva (reconstruction Carolina Guedes); f) Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology of the University of São Paulo; i) Visitor Center "Visconde de Porto Seguro"; j) Museum of the City of São Paulo; l) Sorocaba Historical Museum (reconstruction Carolina Guedes). Photos: M. Sallum: b, c, e, g, h, m, n, o, p, q; F. Noelli: d, j, l.
Figure 5 Pots produced in communities of São Paulo and Paraná that share the same features as those made in several archaeological sites dated between the 16 th and 20 th centuries: a) British Museum; b, c, e, g, h, m, n, o, p, q) Collection by Herta Scheuer - Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology of the UFPR; d) Historical Museum of Itapeva (reconstruction Carolina Guedes); f) Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology of the University of São Paulo; i) Visitor Center "Visconde de Porto Seguro"; j) Museum of the City of São Paulo; l) Sorocaba Historical Museum (reconstruction Carolina Guedes). Photos: M. Sallum: b, c, e, g, h, m, n, o, p, q; F. Noelli: d, j, l.CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 6 A, C, D) Ceramist Ana Pereira and the production of the Paulistaware (20 th century, Vale do Ribeira). Photo: Plácido Campos. Collection: São Paulo Museum of Image and Sound; B) ' rescue ' of pottery practice by the Tabaçu Rekoypy community, Piaçaguera Indigenous Land (Peruíbe), 2021, photo courtesy of Luã Apyká.
Figure 6 A, C, D) Ceramist Ana Pereira and the production of the Paulistaware (20 th century, Vale do Ribeira). Photo: Plácido Campos. Collection: São Paulo Museum of Image and Sound; B) ' rescue ' of pottery practice by the Tabaçu Rekoypy community, Piaçaguera Indigenous Land (Peruíbe), 2021, photo courtesy of Luã Apyká.CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 7 Mapping the communities of women ceramists by Herta Scheuer (1960s and 1970s, São Paulo, Paraná, Minas Gerais e Goiás) (H. Scheuer photo collection from the Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology, Federal University of Paraná: a, b, d, e, f);. A, B) Coiling technique; D) Oven (barranco); E, F) Soenga; C) Coiling technique, Apiaí (Photo: Mayy Koffler).
Figure 7 Mapping the communities of women ceramists by Herta Scheuer (1960s and 1970s, São Paulo, Paraná, Minas Gerais e Goiás) (H. Scheuer photo collection from the Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology, Federal University of Paraná: a, b, d, e, f);. A, B) Coiling technique; D) Oven (barranco); E, F) Soenga; C) Coiling technique, Apiaí (Photo: Mayy Koffler).CC-BY · From the PDF

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 69

  1. Arnold, B. 2006. 'Arierdämmerung': Race and Archaeology in Nazi Germany. World Archaeology 38 (1): pp.8-31. https://doi.org/10.1080/00438240500509744 · DOI
  2. Atalay, S. 2006. Indigenous Archaeology as Decolonizing Practice. The American Indian Quarterly 30 (3): pp.280-310.
  3. Balanzátegui Moreno, D. 2022. Narrativas del paisaje histórico afroecuatoriano en la Concepción (Carchi-Ecuador). Cadernos do Lepaarq 19 (37): pp.250-72. https://doi.org/10.15210/LEPAARQ.V19I37.22606 · DOI
  4. Battle-Baptiste, W. 2011. Black Feminist Archaeology. Walnut Creek: Left Coast Press.
  5. Bergquist-Turori, M. 2022. Te `iti nei te marama kīkau: Reconnecting Work Practices to the Land for Our Wellbeing. Seeding Relations: Beyond Settler Colonial and Racialized Ecologies -Virtual Graduate Student Conference. Mahindra Humanities Center at Harvard and Native American and Indigenous Studies at Brown University, 25-26 March.
  6. Casimiro, T M. 2022. Porque importa saber de cerâmica portuguesa no colonialismo atlântico? Cadernos do Lepaarq 19 (37): pp.230-49. https://doi.org/10.15210/LEPAARQ.V19I37.22651 · DOI
  7. Casimiro, T M and Sequeira, J. 2020. Introdução. In: Casimiro, T M and Sequeira, J. (Eds). Arqueologia contemporânea em Portugal: Séculos XIX e XX. Oeiras: Mazu Press: pp.9-16.
  8. Cipolla, C N, Quinn, J and Levy, J. 2019. Theory in collaborative indigenous archaeology: insights from Mohegan. American Antiquity 84 (1): pp. 127-142. https://doi.org/10.1017/aaq.2018.69 · DOI · Paper page
  9. Coelho, R G. 2020. Como descolonizar a arqueologia portuguesa? In: Arnaud, J M, Neves, C and Martins A. (Eds.) Arqueologia em Portugal. 2020 -O Estado da Questão. Lisboa: Associação dos Arqueólogos Portugueses/CITCEM: pp.25- 40.
  10. Cusicanqui, S R. 2020. Ch'ixinakax utxiwa: On Decolonising Practices and Discourses, Cambridge: Polity.
  11. Cusicanqui, S R and Santos, B S. 2015. Conversa del mundo. In: Santos, B S. (Ed.). Revueltas de indignación y otras conversas. La Paz: Stigma: p.80-123.
  12. Dring, K S, Silliman, S W, Gambrell, N, Sebastian, S, and Sidberry, R S. 2019. Authoring and Authority in Eastern Pequot Community Heritage and Archaeology. Archaeologies: Journal of the World Archaeological Congress 15 (3): pp.352-70. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11759-019-09377-4 · DOI
  13. Foucault, M. 1990. Qu'est-Ce Que La Critique? Critique et Aufklärung. Bulletin de la Société Française de Philosophie 84 (2): pp.35-63.
  14. Foucault, M. 2005 [1970]. Retornar à História. In: Foucault, M. Arqueologia das ciências e história dos sistemas de pensamento. Rio de Janeiro: Forense Universitária: pp.282- 95.
  15. Funari, P P, Zarankin, A, Salerno, M. (Eds.). 2010. Memories from Darkness: Archaeology of Repression and Resistance in Latin America. New York: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-0679-3 · DOI
  16. Amoretti, M C and Vassallo, N. (Eds.). Meta-Philosophical Reflection on Feminist Philosophies of Science. New York: Springer: pp.151-170. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319- 26348-9_9 · DOI
  17. González, L. 1988. Por un feminismo afrolatinoamericano. Isis Internacional -Mujeres por un desarrollo alternativo 9: pp.133-41.
  18. González, L. 1983. Racismo e sexismo na cultura brasileira. Ciências Sociais Hoje 2: pp.223-44.
  19. González, L. 2021. Racism and sexism in Brazilian culture. Women's Studies Quarterly, 49 (1): pp.371-94.
  20. González-Ruibal, A. 2008. Time to Destroy: An Archaeology of Supermodernity. Current Anthropology 49 (2): 247-79. https://doi.org/10.1086/526099 · DOI · Paper page
  21. Hamilakis, Y. 2013. Archaeology and the Senses: Human Experience, Memory, and Affect. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139024655 · DOI
  22. Hartemann, G and Moraes, I. 2017. Contar histórias e caminhar com ancestrais: por perspectivas afrocentradas e decoloniais na arqueologia. Vestígios-Revista Latino- Americana de Arqueologia Histórica 12 (2): pp.9-34. https://doi.org/10.31239/vtg.v12i2.12196 IBGE. 2019. Base Territorial, Censos e Povos e Comunidades Tradicionais. 2019. Rio de Janeiro: IBGE. IBGE. 2019. Censo agropecuário: resultados definitivos 2017. Rio de Janeiro: IBGE. · DOI
  23. Flores-Muñoz J and Flores, F M. 2022. Tochan, "The House of all of us": Decolonizing Space through Nahua Oral Narratives. Ethnoarchaeology 14 (1): pp.30-50. https://doi.org/10.1080/19442890.2022.2088180 · DOI
  24. Krahô, C P. 2017. Mulheres-cabaças. PISEAGRAMA 11: pp.110-7.
  25. Krenak, A. 2015. Encontros: Ailton Krenak. In: Cohn, S. (Ed.). Encontros: Ailton Krenak. Rio de Janeiro: Azougue.
  26. Krenak, A. 2016. "Alianças vivas" (Interview by Cesarino, P). In: Cohn, S and Kadiwel, I (Eds.). Aílton Krenak: Coleção Tembetá. Rio de Janeiro: Azougue: pp.169-84.
  27. Krenak, A. 2020. Ideas to Postpone the End of the World. Translated by Anthony Doyle. Toronto: House of Anansi Press.
  28. Lagrou, E. 2013. No caminho da miçanga: Arte e alteridade entre os ameríndios. Revista Enfoques. Etnografia, Arte e Imagem 12: pp.18-49.
  29. Lightfoot, K 1995 Culture Contact Studies: Redefining the relationship between prehistoric and historical archaeology. American Antiquity 60 (2): pp.199-217. https://doi.org/10.2307/282137 · DOI · Paper page
  30. Lima, A, Prado, D M, Castro, R R, Andriolli, C, Carneiro, A A, Carneiro, A, Carneiro, C, Alves, D, Prado, E, Prado, E, Carneiro, H, Prado, I, Otsuka, K, Prado, M V, Sardinha, M, Prado, N, Prado, O, Franco, P, Prado, P, Prado, P S, Prado, V, Honorato, V and Souza, Z. 2022. Comunidade tradicional caiçara da Jureia (Litoral sul do Estado de São Paulo, Brasil). In: da Cunha, M C, Magalhães, S B and Adams, C. (Eds.). Povos tradicionais e biodiversidade no Brasil: contribuições dos povos indígenas, quilombolas e comunidades tradicionais para a biodiversidade, políticas e ameaças. São Paulo: SBPC: pp.16-75.
  31. Macuxi, J E. 2021. O encontro à beira do abismo -o grito da AIC é por mais vida. In: 34ª Bienal de São Paulo: Faz escuro mas eu canto: catálogo. São Paulo: Bienal de São Paulo: pp.86-91.
  32. Mathieson, L. 2018. O recenseamento escolar de 1920 na imprensa paulista: uma campanha cívica de combate ao analfabetismo. Educação & Pesquisa 44: pp.1- 20.
  33. McGuire, R H. 2015. Arqueología crítica y praxis. Cuba Arqueológica: Revista Digital de Arqueología 8 (1): pp.5-11.
  34. Mello, L C. 2022. Juntando cacos: Persistência e reexistência nas práticas cerâmicas do vale do Guaporé. Cadernos do Lepaarq 19 (37): pp.92-123. https://doi.org/10.15210/lepaarq.v19i37.22646 · DOI
  35. Mickel, A. 2021. Why Those Who Shovel Are Silent: A History of Local Archaeological Knowledge and Labor. Colorado: University Press of Colorado.
  36. Monteiro, J M. 1999. Armas e Armadilhas. In Novaes, A. (Ed.). A Outra Margem do Ocidente. São Paulo: Companhia das Letras: pp.237-50.
  37. Moraes, I P, Costa, L A and de Jesus L L. 2022. Arqueologia, lugar de fala e conexões afrodiaspóricas: experiências no território quilombola dos povos Aproaga - Amazônia paraense. Cadernos do Lepaarq 19 (37): pp.55-74. https://doi.org/10.15210/lepaarq.v19i37.22762 · DOI
  38. Noelli, F S and Ferreira, L M. 2007. A persistência da teoria da degeneração indígena e do colonialismo nos fundamentos da arqueologia brasileira. História, Ciências, Saúde-Manguinhos 14: pp.1239-64. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0104-59702007000400008 · DOI
  39. Noelli, F S and Sallum, M. 2019. A cerâmica paulista: cinco séculos de persistência de práticas tupiniquim em São Paulo e Paraná, Brasil. Mana. Revista de Antropologia Social 25 (3): pp.702-42. https://doi.org/10.1590/1678-49442019v25n3p701 · DOI · Paper page
  40. Noelli, F S and Sallum, M. 2020a. Comunidades de mulheres ceramistas e a longa trajetória de itinerância da cerâmica paulista. Revista do Museu de Arqueologia e Etnologia 34: pp.132-53. https://doi.org/10.11606/issn.2448-1750.revmae.2020.166053 · DOI
  41. Noelli, F S and Sallum, M. 2020b. "Para cozinhar... as panelas da Cerâmica Paulista". Habitus. Revista do Instituto Goiano de Pré-História e Antropologia 18 (2): pp.501-38. https://doi.org/10.18224/hab.v18i2.8436 · DOI
  42. Noelli, F S and Sallum, M. 2021. Por uma história da linguagem da Cerâmica Paulista: as práticas compartilhadas pelas mulheres. Revista Brasileira de Linguística Antropológica 13 (1): pp.367-96. https://doi.org/10.26512/rbla.v13i01.40664 · DOI
  43. Panich, L. 2020. Narratives of Persistence: Indigenous Negotiations of Colonialism in Alta and Baja California. Tucson: The University of Arizona Press.
  44. Panich, L, Allen, R and Galvan, A. 2018. The Archaeology of Native American Persistence at Mission San José. Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology 38 (1): pp.11-29.
  45. Pereira, D. 2019. O "roubo das urnas": a relação do patrimônio arqueológico salvaguardado e os coletivos humanos. Habitus. Revista do Instituto Goiano de Pré- História e Antropologia 17 (1): pp.39-52. https://doi.org/10.18224/hab.v17i1.7112 · DOI
  46. Rocha, B C, Jácome, C, Stuchi, F F, Mongeló, G Z and Valle, R. 2013. Arqueologia pelas gentes. Revista de Arqueologia 26 (1): pp.130-40. https://doi.org/10.24885/sab.v26i1.373 · DOI
  47. Rubertone, P E. 2020. Native Providence: Memory, Community, and Survivance in the Northeast. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.
  48. Runia, E. 2006. Presence. History and Theory 45 (1): pp.1-29. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2303.2006.00346.x · DOI
  49. Sallum, M. 2015. Estudos Coloniais e Globalização: fluxos, fricções e confluências. Habitus. Revistado Instituto Goiano de Pré-História e Antropologia 13: pp.51-62. https://doi.org/10.18224/hab.v13.1.2015.51-62 · DOI
  50. Sallum, M. 2018. Colonialismo e ocupação tupiniquim no litoral sul de São Paulo: uma história de persistência e prática cerâmica. Unpublished PhD thesis, Universidade de São Paulo.
  51. Sallum, M and Noelli, F S. 2020. An Archaeology of Colonialism and the Persistence of Women Potters' Practices in Brazil: From Tupiniquim to Paulistaware. International Journal of Historical Archaeology 24 (3): pp.546-70. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10761-019-00517-8 · DOI
  52. Sallum, M and Noelli, F S. 2021a. "A pleasurable job"… Communities of women ceramicists and the long path of Paulistaware in Sao Paulo. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 61 (1): pp.101-245. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaa.2020.101245 · DOI
  53. Sallum, M and Noelli, F S. 2021b. "Politics of Regard" and the Meaning of Things: The persistence of ceramic and agroforestry practices by women in São Paulo. In: Panich, L M and Gonzalez, S L. (Eds.). The Routledge Handbook of the Archaeology of Indigenous-Colonial Interaction in the Americas, London: Routledge. pp.338-56.
  54. Sallum, M and Noelli, F S. 2022. "Política da consideração" e o significado das coisas: A persistência de comunidades de práticas agroflorestais em São Paulo. Cadernos do Lepaarq 19 (37): pp.356-89. https://doi.org/10.15210/LEPAARQ.V19I37.22874 · DOI
  55. Samia, D. 2021. Arqueologia pedagógica: reflexões teóricas e conceituais. Revista de Arqueologia Pública: Revista Eletrônica do Laboratório de Arqueologia Pública da UNICAMP 17 (2): pp.179-95. https://doi.org/10.20396/rap.v16i2.8666241 · DOI
  56. Santos, A B. 2020. We belong to the land. Translated by C. Zigoni. AGITATE! Journal. 7 August 2020. https://agitatejournal.org/we-belong-to-the-land/
  57. Schmidt, P R and Kehoe, A B. 2019. Archaeologies of Listening: Beginning Thoughts. In: Schmidt, P R and Kehoe, A B. (Eds.). Archaeologies of Listening. Gainesville: University Press of Florida: pp.1-22.
  58. Segato, R L. 2010. Género y colonialidad: en busca de claves de lectura y de un vocabulario estratégico decolonial. In: Quijano, A and Navarrete, J M. (Eds.). La Cuestión Descolonial. Lima: Universidad Ricardo Palma/Cátedra América Latina y la Colonialidad del Poder.
  59. Senatore, M X and Funari, P P. 2022. Narrativas insulares en la arqueología del colonialismo moderno español y portugués. problemas y perspectivas. Cadernos do Lepaarq 19 (37): pp.75-91. https://doi.org/10.15210/lepaarq.v19i37.22717 · DOI
  60. Sheptak, R N and Joyce, R A. 2019. Hybrid Cultures: the visibility of the European invasion of Caribbean Honduras in the sixteenth Century. In: Hofman, C and Keehmen, K. (Eds.). Material Encounters and Indigenous Transformations in the Early Colonial Americas. Leiden: Bill. pp.221-37. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004273689_011 · DOI
  61. Silliman, S W. 2009. Change and Continuity, Practice and Memory: Native American Persistence in Colonial New England. American Antiquity 74 (2): pp.211-30. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0002731600048575 · DOI
  62. Silliman, S W. 2012. Between the longue durée and the short purée. In: Oland, M Hart, S M and Frink, L. (Eds). Decolonizing Indigenous Histories: Exploring Prehistoric/Colonial Transitions in Archaeology. Tucson: The University of Arizona Press. pp.113-32.
  63. Souza, M A T. 2017. A Arqueologia dos grupos indígenas em contextos históricos. Revista de Arqueologia 30 (1): pp.144-67. https://doi.org/10.24885/sab.v30i1.505 · DOI
  64. Souza, R A. 2020. Deixa meu cabelo em paz e outros contos sobre Arqueologia do Racismo à Brasileira. Revista de Arqueologia 33 (2): pp.43-65. https://doi.org/10.24885/sab.v33i2.743 · DOI
  65. Stottman, J M. 2010. Introduction: Archaeologists as Activists. In: Stottman, J M. (Ed.). Archaeologists as Activists: Can Archaeologists Change the World? Tuscaloosa: The University of Alabama. pp.1-17.
  66. Todd, Z. 2016. An Indigenous Feminist's Take on the Ontological Turn: 'Ontology' is just another word for colonialism. Journal of Historical Sociology 29 (1): pp.4-22. https://doi.org/10.1111/johs.12124 · DOI · Paper page
  67. Wendrich, W. 2012. Archaeology and Apprenticeship: Body Knowledge, Identity, and Communities of Practice. In: Wendrich, W. (Ed.). Archaeology and Apprenticeship. Body Knowledge, Identity, and Communities of Practice. Tucson: The University of Arizona Press: pp.1-19.
  68. Willey, G and Phillips, P. 1958. Method and Theory in American Archaeology. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
  69. Xakriabá, C. 2020. Amansar o giz. PISEAGRAMA 14: pp.110-117.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 2

Metadata

Authors
Sallum, M.
Affiliations
Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology, University of São Paulo
Venue
Papers from the Institute of Archaeology
Publisher
UCL Press
Published
2023-05-09
Volume
34
Issue
1
ISSN
2041-9015
DOI
10.14324/111.444.2041-9015.1392
Cited by
2
References
2
Licence
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 (unspecified)

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review