User:CL.07/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Talk:C (programming language)

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
(Briefly explain why you chose it, why it matters, and what your preliminary impression of it was.)

I chose this article because it is related to a topic that I am familiar with and I know has importance. However, the actual article content assessment was rated as C-class. My first impression was that article was very long and had a lot of good information included

Evaluate the article
(Compose a detailed evaluation of the article here, considering each of the key aspects listed above. Consider the guiding questions, and check out the examples of what a useful Wikipedia article evaluation looks like.)

The lead includes an introductory sentence that in my mind provides a concise and clear description of the article. It does seem to include a brief description of the article's major sections. I do not see anything in the lead that is not present in the article. It is also very concise considering the length of the article. Regarding the content it does seem to be updated quite frequently, however in the talk section it is obvious there is so controversy regarding what level C is considered. Whether it has a use in general-purpose programming or not is also being argued. The tone of the article is neutral as to be expected, but their are cases of claims such as saying c-language should be used for a certain activity that is debatable. The sources are thorough, cover current information, and display a wide variety of information. The article is organized into similar sections based on the information. I was not able to find any grammar or spelling errors. The article does include a couple of graphs and images that are sourced correctly and add to the overall content. The talk page shows that article is rated highly important in terms of topic, but is overall C-class in terms of content quality. It was a former featured article and was nominated for deletion in 2013. Overall the article needs to clarify where the language needs to stand, and then wrap the article more around that point. I would say the article is well-developed, and so I am not sure why it is C-class.