User:Lg720/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Batak Karo language

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
The reason I chose to evaluate an article on the Batak Karo language is because I have an interest in Indonesia, of which Batak Karo is an endangered language. Present day Indonesia is an amalgamation of cultures that came to Indonesia through trade during ancient times. Made up of over 13,000 islands, different regions reflect different cultures/religions. Ancient Indonesia's Hindu-Buddhist Majapahit empire brought all these islands together into one. Indonesia has culturally been influenced by countries from all over Asia, and it goes to without saying that the different languages spoken on the archipelago would have just as a varied and historically rich background as the country does. The language is Austronesian in classification, and it is not critically endangered, but at risk, which makes it easier to gather information on.

Evaluate the article
Lead Section: The lead section includes an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic, and includes a brief description of the article's major sections. It is concise and detailed, but not overly so. The lead section of the article does include some historical information on the derivation of the script of the language that does not have it's own section in the article, I would make sure to fix that, and add in a new section.

Content: The article's content is relevant to the Batak Karo language and has been edited very recently--February 9th 2021--but the sources are a bit outdated (check sources and references section). There is no content that does not belong, however, the article is very short and could add more on the history of the language and how it came to Indonesia. The article deals with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps, as the Batak Karo language is not widely spread or known, and represents a minority culture, therefore being underrepresented.

Tone and Balance: The tone of the article is neutral and there are no biased claims toward a particular position. There are no viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented. There aren't really any viewpoints since all the information in the article is undisputed fact, it therefore, does not persuade the reader of anything.

Sources and References: All facts in the article are backed up by a reliable secondary source of information. The most recent source is 2005, the other sources are from the years: 2001, and 1996. The sources are not current, being more than ten years old, but they are not very old either, however, there could probably be more information in newly published, even more current sources. There are four sources, which seems alright at first, but there are only two authors which wrote two of the sources each. After doing some searching there are some--not necessarily better but-- more sources available on the topic. The links to the sources are functional.

Organization and Writing Quality: The article is well-written and easy to read with no unnecessary words or grammar mistakes. It is well-organized and broken down into relevant sections, however, as stated above, I think that the derivation of the script could use it's own section rather than just being information that is solely in the lead. There are tables that help readers understand the phonology of the language, and also a sample sentence and translation.

Images and Media: There is an image of the distribution of the Batak Karo language on a map of Indonesia, which is very helpful as a visual tool to understand more about the geographics of the language. It would be also be good if there was a picture of the people who speak the Batak Karo language.

Talk Page: The talk page is not very active, there is one conversation on external links, and one person who claimed to be a native speaker of Batak Karo who translated a sentence into English. The article is rated a C-Class article, and is part of two WikiProjects, one being "Language Articles," and the other being "Indonesia Articles."

Overall Impressions: What information the article does have is reliable and well-written, however, there is not much information and the article could be expanded upon. The media and organization of the article is well thought out and helps the reader navigate the page and understand the topic being discussed with ease. The article is underdeveloped and should be worked on more, there should also be a more variety of sources in order to make the article more notable.