This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Linguistics: Applied Linguistics This article is within the scope of WikiProject Linguistics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of linguistics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LinguisticsWikipedia:WikiProject LinguisticsTemplate:WikiProject LinguisticsLinguistics articles ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by Applied Linguistics Task Force. Education Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Education, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of education and education-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EducationWikipedia:WikiProject EducationTemplate:WikiProject Educationeducation articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Sorry to say, but this article needs a complete revamp and serious literature review. The lexical approach being centered on lexical suites is partial, and not the focus of many research on the field, who focus on foraging strategies, flashcards, frequency lists, cognition, etc. See Paul Nation, Meara, Oxford, Swan, etc. Hugo en résidence ( talk) 15:33, 8 April 2024 (UTC) reply

I second that. But I think it should primarily focus on Lewis's contribution (after all, he introduced the term). Paul Nation (and some other researchers mentioned in the article) are anything but lexical approach. Leoseliv ( talk) 16:34, 4 May 2024 (UTC) reply