User:Alexis11009/User:Arthistory32/Hoʻolauleʻa/Alexis11009 Peer Review

Lead Guiding questions: Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer? -N/A Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? -Yes, includes the language, state, festival, and the actions/activities that occur Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? -Yes, includes hula dancing, food, and vendors Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? -No Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? -The lead is easy to read and to the point. Some links include extra information Content Guiding questions: Is the content added relevant to the topic? -yes the content that is displayed relays to the content, but there is no additional information added besides questions Is the content added up-to-date? -yes, both articles have been updated in the past 30 days “celebrate” translation was updated 3 years ago Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? -No, all content is relevant to the topic. Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? -N/A Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics? -Yes, the Ho’olaule’a festival Tone and Balance Guiding questions: Is the content added neutral? -yes content added is questions that pertain to the topic Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? -N/A Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? -no, the lead was neutral and did not mainly focus on one specific topic heavily. Included all parts going to be discussed and the article body reflects sections to provide further information within Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? -no, all information includes clear and equal opportunities to learn about each subheading that will be filled in Sources and References Guiding questions: Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? -yes 3 sources included in the lead that give further insight on the topic(Hawaii, hula dancing festival, “celebrate” translation to the topic of choice Does the content accurately reflect what the cited sources say? (You'll need to refer to the sources to check this.) -yes, gives insight into the topic in the lead Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? -there are sources in the lead no writing outside of questions asked that support the topic in article body Are the sources current? -yes all but one have been revised in the past 30 days, translation source last updated 3 years ago Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible? -N/A Are there better sources available, such as peer-reviewed articles in place of news coverage or random websites? (You may need to do some digging to answer this.) -yes additional information can be included Check a few links. Do they work? -yes all links work on wiki Organization Guiding questions: Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? - lead is easy to read article body only contains questions Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors? - no grammatical errors when put into Grammarly Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? -Once completed, the content would be well organized and clearly understand the topic and what to look for. Has diverse inclusion in food, activities and the culture behind chosen topic Images and Media Guiding questions: If your peer added images or media Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? -yes in sources. No photos added on main page Are images well-captioned? -N/A Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? -N/A Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? -N/A For New Articles Only If the draft you're reviewing is for a new article, consider the following in addition to the above. Does the article meet Wikipedia's Notability requirements - i.e. Is the article supported by 2-3 reliable secondary sources independent of the subject? -No, 3 sources, 1 reference listed How exhaustive is the list of sources? Does it accurately represent all available literature on the subject? -3 sources 1 reference Does the article follow the patterns of other similar articles - i.e. contain any necessary infoboxes, section headings, and any other features contained within similar articles? -No, article has original set up Does the article link to other articles so it is more discoverable? -N/A Overall impressions Guiding questions: Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete? -N/A What are the strengths of the content added? -the lead has a lot of important information that can guide the reader to easily understand and engage into the article How can the content added be improved? -finishing adding information into the question sections made. The lead is strong and to the point. The source added help understand not only what the article will discuss but further information on land and culture.

General info
(Arthistory32/Ho'olaule'a)
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing:https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Arthistory32/Ho%CA%BBolaule%CA%BBa&oldid=1180828411
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists):

Evaluate the drafted changes
(Compose a detailed peer review here, considering each of the key aspects listed above if it is relevant. Consider the guiding questions, and check out the examples of what feedback looks like.)