User:ViolaCello01/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
English phonology

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose this article because I found it in the list of C-class articles and I am very interested in the topic. The article is important because english is one of the most widely spoken languages in the world, used by both native speakers as well as many non-native speakers as a common global language. It is vital to provide a detailed and accurate description of English phonology as a reference for those who are learning English. My overall impression of this article is quite good, although the lead section is a bit clunky.

Lead Section
The lead section's introductory sentence does not define what the article will be discussing. There are a few random points about English phonology that are mentioned in this section, which seem out of place and clunky. I think this section needs an introduction that does a better job of preparing the reader for what they are going to be reading about.

Content
The article's content is extremely thorough. Every major phonological aspect seems to be covered. The article focuses mainly focuses on General American, Received Pronunciation, and General Australian, with other dialectal variants mentioned as notes. Overall, I think that this article has a fairly good content section. The writing tone is very neutral and the language is clear and concise. The IPA charts used are very helpful in understanding the underlying structure of English's phonemic inventory.

Sources and References
There are hundreds of sources used to write this article. The links that I clicked on all seemed to work, and they directed me to journals and textbooks about English phonology.

Talk Page
The talk page of this article contains respectful discussion of what can be improved, specifically, a lot about what IPA symbols should be used and how they should be labeled, among other topics. This seems like a very productive and helpful talk page.

Overall Thoughts
I think this article is quite good, with the exception of the lead section. By making the lead section more concise, I believe a reader will have a much better idea of what the article will be about.