Talk:Self access language learning centers

Excellent start

Looks pretty good for a start.

An article in Wikipedia needs a lead before the table of contents. (fixed?)

Looks good. I tweaked it a little. — BQZip01 — ^talk 22:02, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Bolding items for their definitions really isn't necessary and is contrary to guidance. (fixed)

Looks good — BQZip01 — ^talk 22:02, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Subheadings should be named IAW WP:MoS. I recommend reading this all the way through so you can get a better idea of how articles are done. (specifically note capitalization and length). (Fixed)

Good — BQZip01 — ^talk 22:02, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Reference footnotes should IMMEDIATELY follow their preceding punctuation:

Blah blah blah.¹ not Blah blah blah. ¹ (Fixed)

Good. — BQZip01 — ^talk 22:02, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Make sure that your references are formatted properly and that dates are "wikified" appropriately.

Try to incorporate lists into prose and get rid of "1)...2)...3)...etc." While lists have their purpose, they really don't flow well for purposes of reading. (Fixed?)

Better, but still could be rewritten better completely into prose: "There are a wide variety of types of self access learning centers. One of these is... <Next paragraph>Another kind of... <next paragraph>Some learning centers are built around a ZZZZZ concept... etc." — BQZip01 — ^talk 22:02, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Expand! This is great info, but there should also be more behind it. Any history? Who first founded these? What kind of students attend (graduates? undergrads? anyone in the community (I wont be able to expand this article too much more this semester due to time constraints but a good suggestion for future development. I also realize that just about all the sources I have read about SALCs do not include a kind of "history")

Again, just expand as you can. — BQZip01 — ^talk 22:02, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Try to avoid hyperbole. As an example: "...just about any kind of technology imaginable." I'm in the U.S. military and I believe I can imagine quite a lot of technology that ISN'T in these centers.

There are a few grammatical errors. I recommend cutting and pasting into Microsoft Word and running a grammar check. (checking grammar is always a good idea but grammar check????)

In microsoft word, pressing F7 will initiate a check of the grammar and spelling of the entire document (or a selected portion). There are websites that do the same thing, but many of them are pay sites. — BQZip01 — ^talk 22:02, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

For more semi-automated feedback, I recommend this tool. An example of its feedback on your article is below.

If you want to try and get this to featured article status, let me know and I can give you a lot more feedback on more technical matters. As it is right now it is a good beginning. Keep up the good work. — BQZip01 — ^talk 22:34, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Lead

Would it be better to rework the "Definition" section as the lead or write a completely new lead? Thelmadatter 14:45, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

The Lead should be a summary of the entire article, so I think the definitions could be included, but should not be the entire lead. — BQZip01 — ^talk 14:58, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

OK... I think I have the lead done. Care to check it out? Thelmadatter 19:16, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Semi-automated peer review

Performed by — BQZip01 — ^talk 22:34, 13 September 2007 (UTC) The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.

• Please expand the lead to conform with guidelines at Wikipedia:Lead. The article should have an appropriate number of paragraphs as is shown on WP:LEAD, and should adequately summarize the article.^[?]
• Consider adding more links to the article; per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (links) and Wikipedia:Build the web, create links to relevant articles.^[?]
• Per Wikipedia:Context and Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates), months and days of the week generally should not be linked. Years, decades, and centuries can be linked if they provide context for the article.^[?]
• This article has no or few images. Please see if there are any free use images that fall under the Wikipedia:Image use policy and fit under one of the Wikipedia:Image copyright tags that can be uploaded. To upload images on Wikipedia, go to Special:Upload; to upload non-fair use images on the Wikimedia Commons, go to commons:special:upload.^[?]
• If there is not a free use image in the top right corner of the article, please try to find and include one.^[?]
• There may be an applicable infobox for this article. For example, see Template:Infobox Biography, Template:Infobox School, or Template:Infobox City.^[?] (Note that there might not be an applicable infobox; remember that these suggestions are not generated manually)
• Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (headings), avoid capitalizing words in section headings unless they are proper nouns or the first word of the heading.^[?]
• Watch for redundancies that make the article too wordy instead of being crisp and concise. (You may wish to try Tony1's redundancy exercises.)
  • Vague terms of size often are unnecessary and redundant - “some”, “a variety/number/majority of”, “several”, “a few”, “many”, “any”, and “all”. For example, “All pigs are pink, so we thought of a number of ways to turn them green.”
• As done in WP:FOOTNOTE, footnotes usually are located right after a punctuation mark (as recommended by the CMS, but not mandatory), such that there is no space in between. For example, the sun is larger than the moon [2]. is usually written as the sun is larger than the moon.[2]^[?]
• Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.^[?]

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, — BQZip01 — ^talk 22:34, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Removed 3 Example Centers

I removed 3 of the example centers. In general, information in Wikipedia articles should be verified by reliable, secondary sources. If any school/location which has a Self access language learning center were to be added here, without reference to secondary sources, this would become nothing more than a glorified directory/linkfarm. If there are secondary sources to verify these schools, feel free to re-add with the proper citations. Qwyrxian (talk) 13:40, 1 August 2010 (UTC)