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

• Name of article: Inversion (linguistics)
• Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
• I thought the article was interesting.

Guiding questions

• Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
• Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
• Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
• Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?

The Lead does describe the topic in a concise manner and is clear on what the overall topic is about. It does go over some of the sections, but doesn't seem like it goes over each of the sections that the article has. The lead is pretty detailed, but seems a little too complex as an overview of the topic.

Guiding questions

• Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
• Is the content up-to-date?
• Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?

All the content in the article is relevant to the topic. A lot of the sources are a little old and there is only a couple within the last few years, but don't think it is necessarily outdated information. I don't necessarily think there is any content that doesn't belong, but there should be more content about other languages or examples in other languages.

Guiding questions

• Is the article neutral?
• Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
• Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
• Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?

I would believe that the article is neutral and doesn't lean one way or another.

Guiding questions

• Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
• Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
• Are the sources current?
• Check a few links. Do they work?

Guiding questions

• Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
• Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
• Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?

I think some of the language seems a little too complex, but for someone who may be a little familiar with the topic they can understand what is being said in the article. I didn't notice any spelling or grammatical errors.

Guiding questions

• Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
• Are images well-captioned?
• Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
• Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?

There wasn't a whole lot of images on the article, but the one that was included helped understand the concept of the article. The image that was included was an editors own work and does not violate the copyright. They are captioned plainly and it gets the point of the image across.

Guiding questions

• What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
• How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
• How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?

There is quite a bit of talk between the editors of the article and evaluating the other's contributions on the topics that are in the article. I don't believe the article is rated or apart of a wikiproject.

Guiding questions

• What is the article's overall status?
• What are the article's strengths?
• How can the article be improved?
• How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?

I think if the article was expanded more upon with the examples of inversion in other languages it would give more content to the article. Though I doesn't seem like there could be much added in terms of images, but there could be more articles/journals that can be used as references for people to use to get more details about the topic. I think the article has been well-developed, but just needs to have more content if that content is out there for this topic.

• 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: