User:Oliviachung5/Indigenous language/Lrli Peer Review

General info
Oliviachung5
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:Oliviachung5/Indigenous language
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists):

Evaluate the drafted changes
Lead

Overall, I believe the lead checks everything that a wikipedia lead should have. You have a clear introductory sentence defining the topic of the article and then you go on to give a brief overview regarding the loss of indigenous language which seems to be the article's main focus. I also think the lead is short and concise.

Content and Tone/Balance

I found all the content on the threats of indigenous languages disappearing to be well-written and reflective of a neutral tone. All the information seems pertinent and up-to-date as well and I think dividing the topic into evidence of the language loss and what can be done to salvage indigenous language is very logical. Personally, I don't feel that the title of the article really captures the essence of its content. While discussing the existential threats and need for preservation of Indigenous language is not out of place, I was under the impression that the article would also give a general rundown on the different characteristics of indigenous languages throughout the world. Of course, that's an extremely broad scope and I imagine there are articles even on wikipedia that are more designed for describing the characteristics and history of certain indigenous languages so I understand the hesitance to try to write a general article about something so large and diverse.

Sources/References

Overall, the sources look good and the plethora of footnotes you have that are spread throughout the article indicates to me that the information is well-supported by the references you have put down. While plenty of your sources do seem very recent, I do notice that your sources have are diverse when it comes to their date of publication. Of course, I am sure that sources published in the 90s still have something significant to say about the state of Indigenous languages today but I think it would help to specifically search the claims and information mentioned in older sources (maybe older than 25 years) and see if any newer sources address them and their validity. However, I do think that is a minor complaint in the grand scheme of a very nice set of sources that have a lot of breadth.

Organization

As said before, I think that organizing the article by discussing the evidence and examples of indigenous language loss and then going into how to preserve indigenous language is very logical. I also think the information you have on those sections nicely expands on them and is very to read. However, if you're looking for more information to add, maybe you could discuss further the tangible benefits of preserving indigenous language and the subsequent consequences if languages continue to be lost at the current rate. Additionally, if you want to include information that is more general about indigenous language itself, you could discuss how it's studied, documented, and discovered in academia for example.

Overall Impressions

Overall, I think you have done a great job on the article. You have supplemented an interesting topic with well-sourced information and maintain an appropriate tone throughout the article. I think if you consider adding more general information on indigenous languages or expanding on what you have already written regrading its critical status, then the article will be near-perfect.