Talk:Philosophy of language/GA1
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
GA Reassessment[edit]
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
s part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles' Project quality task force, all old good articles are being re-reviewed to ensure that they meet current good article criteria (as detailed at WP:WIAGA. I have determined that this article needs some upkeep to maintain its status, and I have some additional comments:
- The lead does not adequately summarize the entire article; rather, it puts out a lot of information into the application and four central problems. That's great and all, but what about the history, etc, in the article? Also, is the info about the four central problems actually in the article body? If not, that's a major issue that needs to be addressed.
- Throughout the article there are lots of one or two-sentence nonparagraphs (a paragraph, by definition, needs at least three or more sentences). These lonely bits need to be expanded, cut, or merged.
- Why does the history section not cover modern developments? It seems like the 20th century could be split off and expanded into its own dedicated subsection.
- "According to Peter J. King, although it has been disputed," Who is Peter J. King? Who disputes him? This is a prime example of weasel words and phrases scattered through the article that need to be corrected.
- "There is a tradition called speculative grammar which existed from the 11th to the 13th century. Leading scholars included among other Martin of Dace and Thomas of Erfurth." Unsourced and alone, see above. More unsourced statements include, but are not limited to:
- "This thought parallels the idea that there is a universal language of music, a theory that has been proven false."
- "European scholarship began to absorb the Indian linguistic tradition only from the mid-18th century, pioneered by Jean François Pons and Henry Thomas Colebrooke (the editio princeps of Varadarāja, a 17th century Sanskrit grammarian, dating to 1849)."
- "A major question in the field – perhaps the single most important question for formalist and structuralist thinkers – is, "How does the meaning of a sentence emerge out of its parts?"
- There's mixed use of the {{quote}} and <blockquote> templates. One or the other should be used (WP:MOSQUOTE)
These are the main issues I've seen—large swaths of the article are seemingly unsourced original research. I am putting the article on hold for one week pending improvements. Keep me appraised on my talk page or (preferably) here. Thanks, Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs(talk) 18:30, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
- As there has been no action on the above concerns, I am delisting the article. If you have any questions or comments, take them to my talk page—I'm not watching these old reviews. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs(talk) 18:39, 15 November 2009 (UTC)