User:Lexieb619/Gascon language/Chrismevs Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Lexieb619


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * Gascon language
 * 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.)

The lead adds new information that is a good introduction to the rest of the article. It doesn't show any bias and shows different viewpoints. It remains neutral and doesn't try to persuade the reader. The article sounds encyclopedic. I think that changing phrases like although, however, and the other one could make it sound more encyclopedic. There is a repetition of the fact that Gascon is its own separate language, but the second time it is brought up more information is provided. It is possible to add the rest of the information to the lead, or in the section Linguistic classification start off with the fact to show that the rest of the information is supporting. I think it would be interesting to expand on the topic of Francization because it is a major factor contributing to the decline of the language and also has broader implications for many languages. Introducing the topic of Gascon's relation to Basque in the lead might be helpful since it comes up a lot in the rest of the article. The lead is concise. All of the content is related to the language and is up to date. The references are relevant, work, and support the content. The writing and tone are a strength of the article. I don't see much that needs to be improved. There aren't any grammar or spelling errors. It is well organized. Photos and tables add a lot to the article.