User:Rebeccaward12/Minderico language/Ak1849 Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Rebeccaward12


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * Minderico language


 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Minderico language

Evaluate the drafted changes
Hi Rebecca, here is my peer review for you

Lead


 * It seems that a new lead has not been added as of yet. However I am sure that you are working on it or will work on it in the future to reflect the new content that you will be adding to the article.
 * The lead given gives a good introduction to the Minderico language. I was able to read the lead and know who spoke the language and where it was spoken.
 * The lead does not include a brief description of the articles major sections, though I am sure this will be added later to fit the new content in the article that you will be adding.
 * The lead includes information that is present in the article. Maybe expand this some more by adding more details as you add more to the article.
 * The lead itself is very concise and well written as it gives the reader the basic information needed to know enough about the language before they start reading the full article

Content


 * The content that has been added to the article is relevant to the topic and there is no information that is invalid either.
 * The content added is somewhat up to date. The latest article in the article is from 2015. Maybe try to find articles that have came out since then and add those into the article as well as newer sources.
 * The content is missing a bit of additional content that would help the audience understand how the language was spoken. Consider adding some phrases or words that the people who spoke the language may have used.
 * The content deals with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps as it references the traders of Minde, where there was a small population.

Tone and Balance


 * The content that is added is completely neutral. There is no sentence that seems to be one sided towards a group of people or a population.
 * There seem to be no viewpoints that are overrepresented. However, when talking about the inhabitants of Minde, maybe include some more information about them as they seem to be underrepresented.

Sources and References


 * The new content is backed up by a reliable secondary source of information. All of them are sourced and cited properly as well.
 * The content further reflects what the cited sources say. For example when discussing how Minderico began to expand its vocabulary, the source Reis, Miguel Coelho dos 1983. Vocabulário do Calão de Minde. Mira de Aire: Tipografia Capaz discussed how the vocab was increased, illustrating how the content reflects what the sources say.
 * The sources themselves are extremely thorough and provide information that is used in the history section of the article.
 * The sources are somewhat current. Some of the sources are before 2000, but majority of them are from after 2000, making them somewhat current.
 * Some of the sources are written by the same authors, however there is a plethora of different authors who have contributed to the articles being used.
 * Through glottolog, you can find more articles however, a lot of them are already cited and used in the article. I found another article by the name of Calão Minderico: alguns termos do 'calão' que usam os cardadores e negociantes de Minde, concelho de Alcanena, which provides good information that you haven't really used yet, even though the article is cited. I recommend using more information from all of the articles listed as there is more to add onto the article.
 * The links work from the external link section. If you want the readers to access articles easier try pasting the links for those as well.

Organization


 * It is really easy to read and well written. I think that going back and maybe rereading anything you add in the future to find grammar errors will be helpful as well.
 * After reading and looking through the article, I was unable to find any grammatical or spelling errors. The article is well written
 * The article is also organized well. You used sections to clearly illustrate what section describes the history and which section gives the links to references. This helped to understand where everything was located on the same page.

Overall Impressions


 * The content that has been added improves the overall quality of the article. The audience is able to gain more knowledge about Minderico. I know that you are still going to be working on adding more sections, filled with more information about the language as well. I suggest maybe adding some type of vocab or words that were used in the language to help give readers a sense of how the language was spoken and how it sounded like. The article itself still needs more information but I'm sure that over time it will become more complete as you add on to it from your sources.
 * The strengths of the content are the sources. They have really good information in them and can be utilized to add a lot more information as well. They provide vast knowledge on a language that is in fact dying. The conciseness of the writing is really good as well, it allows the readers to follow along easier.
 * The content can be improved by maybe adding a couple more sections about the language and more information from the articles. Other than that it is a really well written article.