Talk:Khoe languages

Lead Section

The lead section told what the article was about by providing a little context to the topic and giving some basic background information to start off.

Content

The content presented seemed up to date and they had multiple references that were up to date and recent, but the information they presented was relatively short and nothing more than a short background on the topic since the only sections they presented was a history and classification section.

Tone and Balance

The article presented no bias and just presented facts about the topic of the languages and was neutral in how they presented the information. They showed a short history on the topic and then a way to define what the topic subject was in a very effective way.

Sources and References

The sources presented all work properly and they also are from a variety of authors that present their information effectively. The validity of the sources is definitely backed up by the content they put out. The references were all up to date and provided current information.

Organization and writing quality

Although the information presented was very short it was very well written. It was easy to read and very easy to follow along as the author made it easy to go from one sentence into the next by presenting the information effectively. Some of the names of the languages can be confusing to an average reader just because the names of the people and languages aren't commonly used but some of the other language used to write this assumes that the readers have basic knowledge on the topic.

Images and Media

There are no images in the article.

Talk page Discussion

There is no discussion at all on the talk page there is just information on the WikiProjects the article belongs to.

Overall Impressions

For the content that was presented the article was very well written but where it lacks is in the amount of information it does have. The article is very short and needs to be expanded upon thoroughly to properly give good information on the topic. The article seems quite underdeveloped and it comes directly from the amount of information presented. Manny.Rod1029 (talk) 19:00, 5 February 2021 (UTC)