User talk:Litzyg27/sandbox

Atlas linguistique de la France

The first sentence does clearly state what the article talks about which is influential dialect atlas of Romance varieties in France. It also goes on to state the year(s) it was published in. The article goes on to mention some of the main topics of the article Jules Gillieron and Edmond Edmont and then mentions how Gillieron employed Edmont. Personally I think the lead is a perfect balance to explaining the article, But i could use a bit more detail about the authors or about the article itself because the wiki seems to be a bit too short and could use a bit more description. Content The content does seem to be relevant to the topic, only in some situations does it have relevant content which is in the beginning explaining what the article speaks about, but then it moves on to speak about the authors and not really the map and language. The content does not seem to be up-to-date anymore. Personally I feel like the content about the authors should have been written in a different paragraph and there should be more information on the actual map. Tone and Balance Yes the article is from a neutral point of view. It is just explanatory. This article is m more informative on the map and language. Source and References Yes the statements are backed up by other wikipedia accounts or other sources. The sources do seem to be current enough with the article. This article is not broken down evenly into different sections. It is mainly one paragraph that flows into different topics. This article seems to only have a few links, but they all work. Organization: The article is clear and easy to read, but is not very descriptive and does not go into much detail about the map and language. This article does not have any grammatical errors or spelling. The article is not broken down into sections and runs along one paragraph, but with different topics when I think it should separate with topic to topic. Overall Impressions The article is good. It explains what it is trying to get across, which is the map but goes into much detail about it after that. The article does not section off into different categories for different topics, ex. It could have had a different section for the authors and their lives. This article seems to get right to the point which is good because it explains what it's there for, but could improve on adding more detail about it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlas_linguistique_de_la_France Litzyg27 (talk) 21:41, 5 February 2021 (UTC)Litzy Gonzalez