User talk:Soudeaforbes/Evaluation Lingua franca

Evaluation: Lingua franca
This is where you will complete your article evaluation. Please use the template below to evaluate your selected article.


 * Name of article: Lingua franca
 * As a native English speaker from an immigrant background and former student of French, I find cross-cultural communication and power dynamics of language interesting.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Yes.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? Only in the Contents list.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? No.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? It is concise.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic? Yes
 * Is the content up-to-date? Yes
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? Yes. In the talk section, there is some discussion of whether there is inadequate attention paid to English as the most dominant lingua franca of the current era but the article itself is also somewhat contradictory or unclear and could use further clarification about the characteristics of a lingua franca.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral? Yes
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? No
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? It feels a little difficult to say yes or no to this because "neutrality" often means reinforcement of the status quo (like using 'colonist' versus 'colonizer' or 'settler' which would be more accurate for the Americas) and the history of language and colonization is politically charged in general. I feel like there is a an underrepresentation of post-colonial language usage/adoption but that's something that might be flagged as biased because it touches on sensitive, identity-related issues.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? No

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? No
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? I only have a passing knowledge from 1 anthro-linguistics course in college but I would say no.
 * Are the sources current? For the most part, yes.
 * Check a few links. Do they work? Yes

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? No. The lead and example sections are clear but the characteristics section is not.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors? No
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Yes

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? Yes
 * Are images well-captioned? Somewhat.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? Yes
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? No

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? There is a conversation about whether the article under-emphasizes English as a lingua franca, a concern that one of the image examples of a lingua franca might be too 'charged' because it translates to "atheists," and now, my request for clarification on lingua francas as native languages.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? It is a C-class article and is part of two projects- WikiProject Linguistics and WikiProject Languages.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? I'm not sure if this question applies to our class, but, for me, thinking about writing or editing this articles provides insight into some of the challenges with creating neutral, accurate, informative documentation devoid of even a hint of original research.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status? I think it's active. It's definitely still in need of development.
 * What are the article's strengths? The lead section is concise, informative, and clear. The examples are clearly explained.
 * How can the article be improved? There is a need for more citations. The characteristics section seems underdeveloped based on my basic knowledge of cultural linguistics. I think the article would benefit from a technical explanation of the characteristics of lingua franca. There is also a lack of information on the development of lingua francas in the Americas.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? It is underdeveloped. The subject is not lacking for information or perspectives but the article seems even shallower than surface level for this topic.

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: