User:Ckamikawa/Aoi Matsuri/BeeHiatt Peer Review

Peer review
This is where you will complete your peer review exercise. Please use the following template to fill out your review.

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing? I'm reviewing Celestia K's article. However, I couldn't find a draft for any of the three articles that were assigned. I looked all over the place, but couldn't find anything. So, I'm going to review the original article and hopefully it still proves useful. Let me know if I just was looking in the wrong place!
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: Aoi MatsuriAoi Matsuri

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer?
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?

Lead evaluation
MY THOUGHTS: I feel that the lead would be a great area where you could make a lot of improvements. In this article it is extremely brief and doesn't give me a good idea of what this ritual is about and what takes place. I also notice that some of the language through out the article is a little weird, so perhaps this was translated or written by someone who wasn't extremely proficient in the English language (another thing you could really help with). I think improvement to the lead section would help the article exponentially and make the information that follows a lot easier to understand.

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic?
 * Is the content added up-to-date?
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?

Content evaluation
The content seems to be there, but perhaps it could be organized better. I especially found myself getting confused as it described how the festival developed and as it went over the history. Again, I think just some improvement of grammar and structure could really help in this article. Like I said, theres a lot of information already there but you could really help in the displaying of it.

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral?
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?

Tone and balance evaluation
I couldn't really notice any problems with tone or balance. All seemed fairly neutral.

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Are the sources current?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Sources and references evaluation
3 of the 4 links I checked worked. The sources seem fairly up to date, but wouldn't be bad to see if there was something more recent. Some of the sources were in Japanese. Not a bad thing, but may not be as useful to those who can't read Japanese. From what I can tell there seems to be quite a bit of information on these sources. Some of which didn't make its way into the article. Maybe you could see if they missed anything.

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?

Organization evaluation
I had a hard time with some portions of the article. Like I've said before I think a little time spent into the grammar and organization of the article would be amazing.

"The festival saw its peak of grandeur in the middle of the Heian Period, but this waned in the Kamakura period and the following Muromachi period, and as the nation entered the Sengoku period, the festival procession was discontinued. In the Genroku era (1688–1704) of the Edo period, it was revived, but in the 2nd year of the Meiji period (1869), when the capital was moved from Kyoto to Tokyo, observance of the festival procession stopped. In Meiji-17 (1885), it was again revived as part of a government plan to enliven Kyoto. All but the rituals at the shrine fronts were discontinued from 1944, due to World War II. At last, the festival procession started to be held again from 1953. The Saiō-Dai festival princess tradition was initiated in 1956."

Maybe I'm crazy, but this portion seems a little difficult to understand. Maybe this is something you could organize better. Just seems like a lot of run ons...

Images and Media
Guiding questions: If your peer added images or media


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?

Images and media evaluation
Pictures seem to be relevant and well captioned. I didn't find any problems with them...

For New Articles Only
If the draft you're reviewing is 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?
 * How exhaustive is the list of sources? Does it accurately represent all available literature on the subject?
 * 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?
 * Does the article link to other articles so it is more discoverable?

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete?
 * What are the strengths of the content added?
 * How can the content added be improved?

Overall evaluation
I feel like you picked a really good article to improve. The article seems to be about a subject that has some credible sources that you'd be able to draw upon. I think you can also help simply by reorganizing some parts and going through and fixing the grammar. Seems like a really cool subject and I'm surprised there isn't more on the wiki page! Again, I'm sorry I couldn't find your draft but I hope I was able to point out a few areas that you may be able to improve. Good luck!!

~