User talk:Mnordee2/sandbox

Mnordee2's peer review
Lead section: I really enjoyed the lead section of your article draft. It was helpful to inform the audience on what the article is about and who Hina is known as (her different names, titles, and roles). It was also helpful that you informed the audience with translations of the names of Hina. However, I think that in this lead section you should include a couple of sentences regarding her appearance, since it is included in the Hina article under the Hawaii section.

Structure: There is a clear structure to your article draft (introduction of Hina, historical places associated with Hina in Hawaii, and one of the famous myths about her). However, I think that it would be even more informative to include another example of a myth of Hina (maybe one about Hina and Maui, since you have the “Legends of Maui” as a source in your article draft. Then, you could add the two myths together into a sub-section of the “Hawaiian Myths of Hina” under your Hawaii section.

Balanced coverage: I think that the section’s length is equal to the importance of the articles subject. All of the paragraphs in this article draft are necessary and on-topic. However, the only viewpoints that I feel are missing is being able to view Hina as her role of a mother. This can once again be resolved by adding a summary of the myth of Hina and Maui, which you can find in your resource “Legends of Maui.” I really like how you didn’t draw conclusions or try to convince readers to accept one particular point of view.

Neutral content: I think you really kept the content neutral, good job! I think that you described Hina very well according to your resources. However, I think that after you add some physical descriptions of Hina, your description of her will be complete! You remained neutral in presenting Hina, and you stated the facts you were given about her clearly. There are no words or phrases that don’t seem neutral.

Reliable sources: All of the sources that you cited are reliable. It was very smart that you utilized your resources throughout each paragraph of the section and not just use one per paragraph. All of your statements are cited correctly, good job! Since this is a draft right now, it would be helpful for you to try to find more sources at Hamilton Library. I went to Hamilton Library’s Hawaiian section, on the 5th floor, (since my article is on Hi’iaka), and they were extremely helpful. Your article has a good amount of sources, but it wouldn’t hurt to add a couple more with the help of experienced librarians.

Great job! Pili2 (talk) 03:29, 15 April 2019 (UTC)Pili2 (talk)


 * Pili2 thank you for your excellent feedback, and the personal touch you provided from your own experience researching a topic in Hawaiian mythology. Mnordee2 this peer review should give you lots to work with going forward. You've already done a really great job expanding this section of the Hina entry, and I think that once you check for more sources in the library you'll be able to add even more information (and maybe they can help you branch out and find sources for the other sections as well). It would be very cool if you could find an open-access photo of her heiau on Moloka'i to include in this page. Keep up the great work! Gardneca (talk) 00:19, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
 * One other thing, the book Hina: The Goddess is still available at Hamilton library, so you should definitely check that out..(GR385.H3 V37 2002 ) Gardneca (talk) 00:21, 22 April 2019 (UTC)