User:Sberi/Evaluate an Article

Evaluate an article
This is where you will complete your article evaluation. Please use the template below to evaluate your selected article.


 * Name of article: Traditional grammar
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate: This article discusses the background and usage of grammar, a central component of linguistics.

Lead
The lead is concise and includes a clear introductory sentence into the topic discussed. It includes a brief introduction into traditional grammar but does not discuss the specific sections covered in the article.

Content
The article's content is relevant to traditional grammar and is up to date as can be. There does not seem to be missing content or content that does not belong.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions

The article is completely neutral and does not appear to have any bias. The article provides a diverse array of information regarding grammar worldwide. The article does not seem to persuade the reader towards or away from any particular position.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions

Most of the facts in the article appear to be backed up by a reliable secondary source of information. Some simply redirects the reader to another Wikipedia page. The sources are thorough and often date back several centuries, but they do also represent contemporary beliefs in the field. The links work correctly.

Organization

 * Guiding questions

The article is well written and does not have any errors in grammar. The article is well organized with very clear sections.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions

The article does not contain any images, but they do have several relevant charts.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions

The talk page criticizes the article for being biased towards descriptive grammar and for its broad generalizations. The article seems very similar to the discussions we have had in class, despite the fact that the talk page heavily criticizes it.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions

Overall, the article seems like a strong initial summary into the field of traditional grammar. It could include more sources to counteract the criticism regarding its generalizations. The article seems slightly underdeveloped, but it has a strong section on the history of traditional grammar.

Optional activity

 * Choose at least 1 question relevant to the article you're evaluating and leave your evaluation on the article's Talk page. Be sure to sign your feedback

with four tildes — ~


 * Link to feedback: