User:Opdcanlb7/Resígaro language/Makbwiki Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Opdcanlb7


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:Opdcanlb7/resigarodraftaritcle
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Resígaro language

Lead
There is no clear lead in this wiki page. If we consider all the sentences and short paragraphs that are thrown together as the lead, then it is very poorly organized and lacks relevant information. The editor strangely divides the "intro" into single lines of information that don't particularly flow well together. However, the information included is general and concise. The lead does not include brief descriptions of the future/planned sections of the article. I think the lead needs to be further developed and made into a cohesive paragraph with additional information on the speakers and a bit of history on the language.

Content
All of the content so far is relevant to the topic and is also up to date. Under the "native speakers" section on the right, it says that there are 14 native speakers as of 1976. This is from quite a long time ago, and since the article previously mentioned that there was only one speaker as of 2017, this information should be updated to reflect the current status of the speakers of Resígaro. There is quite a bit of information missing in this article. There is no information on the specific location of the speakers or what the speakers are called. There is also missing information on similar languages to Resígaro. Additionally, morphological and phonological ways of the language are absent (even though there is a source listed that includes that information). Lastly, the only bit of content that seems out of place or unnecessary is the quote that is placed after the sentence on the last speaker's beheading. I don't think the quote adds anything to the article and seems strangely placed.

Images and Media
There are no attached images and media as of now.

Tone and Balance
Considering how short this wiki page is, the content is neutral and spoken in an informative tone without any bias.

Sources and References
All of the sources in this article are current. They seem mostly relevant to the language; however, they are not the best sources out there. All of the sources, except for the fifth one, are not peer-reviewed and instead are links to websites. I think this article would benefit from including more reliable sources. One of the links to a website also does not work (fourth reference).

Additionally, the editor does not utilize the sources as well as he/she could have. For example, under the "Language Contact" section, there is only one sentence that is taken from a 102 page article. There is so much information about morphology and phonology of Resígaro that is excluded from the wiki page that I think is necessary to include.

This article contains a "References" section, but is missing a bibliography. All of the sources for this article are all listed under "References" section.

Another thing I found strange was that the editor includes two in-text citations, but does not include them in the references. They mention Aikhenvald (1999) and Kaufman (1994) in a sentence, but do not cite it in a bibliography or the references, so the reader has no idea where these came from.

Lastly, the references section need a bit of work to properly format the sources in APA style.

Organization
While the content itself is concise and to the point, there are major issues with organization. To begin, there is no clear lead. There are a few lines that are separated as paragraphs, which seems strange. It does not seem cohesive; it is more of information added to a page. Additionally, there is only one subheading, which is titled "language contact." This section adds very little valuable information to the article, since the editor did not take anything meaningful from the article that he/she cited. There are also some grammatical issues within some of the sentences, such as misplaced or missing commas.

Overall Impression
I think that this article needs a lot of work. While it is written concisely and free of bias, it needs to be written in an encyclopedic tone. There needs to be more cohesion in the lead, and more information needs to be added past the lead as well. There is a lack of reliable sources in the references; in fact, there are few sources at all. The article does not seem complete, as there is very limited content, which is why it does not accurately portray all the information available on Resígaro.

I think that user "Opdcanlb7" did an excellent job in updating the lead. Their lead has a much better flow and includes missing information that I was looking for. Additionally, their lead excludes some of the random information that the editor of the original wiki page included. They also included a much more expansive collection of sources and included a bibliography, which is essential.