User:Rgk50/Aragonese language/Silmarlu Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Rgk50


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * Aragonese language


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

Evaluate the drafted changes
The opening sentence concisely describes the article's topic. However it runs a little long and could be made clearer by taking the fact that it is "spoken in several dialects by about 12,000 people as of 2011" and adding it onto the next sentence. In addition a brief sentence each about literature and education could be added to the lead in order to introduce those sections. However, overall the lead is concise and contains no irrelevant information.

The content looks to be up to date and relevant, with many sources from 2009-2017 and all the information directly pertaining to the topic. However some more information about why Aragonese is an endangered language could be added.

The content also appears neutral and factual with no bias.

There is an issue with the last citation under Early modern period in the Literature section that needs to be fixed. In addition the reference Martínez Cortés & Paricio Martín (2017) needs to formatted correctly. However all the English links in the references work and are from diverse and reputable sources (Most of the sources are in Aragonese or Spanish, neither of which I understand). Most content is backed by secondary sources and the few I checked did accurately reflect what their sources state. A brief search for sources brought up many of the same sources used in this article.

The content is mostly well written. There are a few areas where the phrasing could be more encyclopedic such as "Aragonese grammar has a lot in common with Occitan and Catalan, but also Spanish." under the section Grammar in addition to the paragraph under the Lexicology section. These areas clearly convey their meaning but the shorter and choppier sentences stand out against the tone of the rest of the article. These areas also tend to overuse commas and semicolons. However there are no spelling mistakes that I noticed and the sections are well-organized.

Overall the content has improved the overall quality of the article by concisely adding important and pertinent information. However, a few areas in the citations/references need to be corrected and the tone could be tweaked in a few areas to improve the flow of the article.