The review department of the Chicago WikiProject is the project's main forum for conducting detailed reviews—both formal and informal—of particular articles and other content within its scope.
This department provides a convenient collection of Chicago content currently undergoing featured content reviews outside the project:
- Featured article candidates
- Featured article review
- Featured list candidates
- Featured list removal candidates
- Non-article featured content candidates
Several other discussion types use use transclusion friendly discussion. Below you will also find external discussion for
- 1 External peer review
- 2 Featured article candidates
- 3 Featured article review
- 4 Featured list candidates
- 5 Featured list removal candidates
- 6 Non-article featured content candidates
- 7 Good article reassessment
- 8 Articles for deletion
- 9 Illinois
- 10 Good article discussions
- 11 Archives
External peer review
This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I would like to eventually nominate it for FA. This article has already had a peer review and recently passed GA. I would appreciate suggestions on how to make it more comprehensive and how to improve the prose.
- No need to rush...I have other ways of keeping myself busy. :) Good luck on your FAC, by the way. Benny the mascot (talk) 03:15, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
Ruhrfisch comments: Thanks for being so understanding - this looks pretty good to me, so here are some mostly nit-picky suggestions for improvement.
- One thing that is sometimes hard to do is to provide context to the reader about things the author is familiar with. I am fairly familiar with the Chicago area, but was not that sure where Lisle was. A brief description would help (x miles west of the Loop / downtown Chicago) or a map with a dot would help too.
- I also was confused by mentions of the college, but no real resolution on what happened to it - it took me a little searching here, but I assume it is what is now known as Benedictine University in Lisle. The article mentions the university as the site of buildings The St. Procopius monks decided on March 12, 1900, to build a new college on the site of present-day Benedictine University at the southwest corner of Maple and College Avenues., and in terms of a scholarship at the academy, but I think it needs to explicitly say what happened to the college after the academy split. I realize that this article on the Academy, so it need not be a lot of detail, but some is needed.
- The map is nice, but I am guessing the Census does not show buildings (only streets and water), so the source for those needs to be given explicitly - this will be checked at FAC.
- The capitalization of College and Academy by themselves seems a bit odd, though it is done consistently as far as I can tell. The Wikipedia:MOS#Institutions says if it is the generic word (college, academy) by itself it should not be capitalized.
- The lead just seems sparse to me - especially the second and third paragraphs. My rule of thumb is to make sure every header is in the lead somehow - are Demographics and the Christmas Drive there?
- I mentioned the Christmas Drive a little bit, but the Demographics section is already somewhat covered in the lead. ("Benet's average ACT test score has exceeded statewide and national averages, and more than 99 percent of students have gone on to college after graduation")
- The language is decent but I noticed a few rough spots reading - I will try and come back and point some more out soon, here is one to start
- Classes began on March 2, when Rev. Procopius Neuzil taught two remedial high school students in two small rooms at 704 Allport Street for four months. FOur months in one day? Wow that's concentrated teaching! Perhaps Classes began on March 2, and for the next four months Rev. Procopius Neuzil taught two remedial high school students in two small rooms at 704 Allport Street. would be better. I am also not sure students can be remedial - I thought classes were? Could be wrong
Hope this helps. If my comments are useful, please consider peer reviewing an article, especially one at Wikipedia:Peer review/backlog (which is how I found this article). I do not watch peer reviews, so if you have questions or comments, please contact me on my talk page. Yours, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 04:46, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
- More from Ruhrfisch
I will try to point out language that needs work here, as well as any other issues that I notice
- Lead It was founded in 1887 as the all-boys St. Procopius College and Academy by Benedictine monks in Chicago, who also operated the St. Joseph Bohemian Orphanage, which along with St. Procopius later moved to Lisle, approximately 25 miles (40 km) west of Chicago. Could this sentence be split into two? As it is now it is quite long and complex - I would start the new sentence after the word orphanage. Also could the year(s) for the move(s) to Lisle be added to provide context?
- Capitalization of college? The orphanage closed in 1956 to make room for St. Procopius Academy, which then separated from the College in 1957. (In Internet Explorer you can search for a word and it highlights all the matching terms in yellow - might be worth checking caps on college and academy this way)
- Tweak sentence Sacred Heart merged with St. Procopius Academy in 1967
on the St. Procopius campusto establish Benet Academy [on the St. Procopius campus].
- Also, any idea where the name "Benet" came from? a ha - here it says Benet is an English form of Benedict
- Unclear Benet's performing arts program stages multiple musicals ... I think it would be clearer to say Benet's performing arts program stages a musical annually... perhaps saying since when
- Need to be consistent on names - in the text it is "Reverend John Nepomucene Jaeger of the Order of St. Benedict..." but the image caption is just "Abbot Nepomucene Jaeger" (no John). I also wonder since St John of Nepomuk is not well known in the US, if a link would be in order?
- Suggested reoganization Reverend John Nepomucene Jaeger of the Order of St. Benedict was the pastor of the parish[.]
, which served approximately 16,000 to 20,000 parishioners. Chicago at that time had the largest Czech population of any othercity in the world outside of Prague and Vienna. Roughly 50,000 Czech immigrants were served by the three Czech parishes of Chicago, which included [16,000 to 20,000 parishioners at] St. Procopius.
- The source says they were teaching high school classes then, so I would clarify that in Only a two-year [high school] program was offered at the time; the college offered its first four-year high school program in 1904.
- Might flow more smoothly as
The first Bohemian abbot in the United States,Abbot Jaeger[, the first Bohemian abbot in the United States,] founded a Bohemian monastic community in 1894...
- What does better atmosphere mean? The college and academy continued to grow in Chicago; in 1896 the Abbey bought the 104-acre (42 ha) Morris Neff farm in Lisle to gain more space and a better atmosphere. Cleaner air than in the city?
- Since I am assuming that the present Benedictine University still is on the site because they are the re-named St Procopius College, I think that needs to be made clearer in this: The St. Procopius monks decided on March 12, 1900, to build a new college on the site of present-day Benedictine University at the southwest corner of Maple and College Avenues.
- OK I am stopping the rough spots here. I think this would benefit from a copy edit before FAC. There are a few other things I noticed:
- What makes Remembering Lisle a reliable source? See WP:RS
- The alt text for the mascot should desribe it as a bird, not a redwing (there might be those who think of the Detroit Redwings or even Red Wing Shoes
Featured article candidates
Featured article review
Featured list candidates
Featured list removal candidates
Non-article featured content candidates
Good article reassessment
Articles for deletion
- View AfD · ) – (
- ( )
Basically unsourced biography of a living person. Five of the six references point towards the subject's own website, and the other ref is an ABC Chicago report that barely mentions him. The few points in his biography that might merit notability (worked at the Federal Reserve? Taught twenty years at Elmhurst College?) are unsourced. bender235 (talk) 16:41, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Illinois-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:33, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Social science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:33, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:33, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:34, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
- Delete As currently written he lacks the sources required to meet the GNG and being a candidate does not automatically guarantee notability. 22.214.171.124 (talk) 21:18, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
- Weak keep I don't think we should go by the article as written. If we believe he has done notable things and those things are likely in the public domain, we should keep his article. His google news search results suggest that he is likely notable regardless of the state of the article.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 15:46, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
- Weak keep He gets a fair number of mentions in newspapers (and presumably other media that don't show up in a keyword search). According to this ad against his organization: " “Taxpayers United” is actually a tiny organization based in Chicago. It has only one full-time employee: its president, James Tobin, a former Elmhurst College economics professor who reportedly founded the organization back in 1976." I would think that if people take out ads against you, you are probably notable. I'd leave the article but with a "needs sources" banner. LaMona (talk) 19:42, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
- View AfD · ) – (
- ( )
Local High School football coach with no notable national coverage whatsoever. A cursory glance through Google, Yahoo and other search engines barely yield any results for this Bob Shannon, most results back refer to the New York radio personality. Basically it looks more or less a self promotional page. TheGoofyGolfer (talk) 13:30, 23 October 2014 (UTC)
- Keep - With the recent improvements to the page and the various sources listed, I believe it fulfills the WP:GNG and WP:BLP.Aytea (talk) 14:44, 23 October 2014 (UTC)
- Keep The article has sources from CNN, ESPN, USA Today, Associated Press, Chicago Sun Timesa and others. This is all significant coverage from reliable sources and they are all independent of Bob Shannon. When I searched for Bob Shannon I found many references about him. He meets the basic biography guideline and the general notability guideline. GB fan 15:01, 23 October 2014 (UTC)
- Keep per GB fan. Amply passes GNG. --Arxiloxos (talk) 15:21, 23 October 2014 (UTC)
- Delete The page reads like an advertisement/self-promotion (e.g. USA Today "title") for a very minor staff member of high schools, not even colleges. Googling his name suggests he is either a radio host or a boxer--in short, other people who are more notable than him come up in google search results instead. The page fails to be encyclopedic as there is no mention of the sports science techniques he uses, nor is there anything about his background/education. It reads like a CV/resume for a minor school staffer trying to get a book deal or a job...It is also a stub and highly unlikely to ever become a full-fledged GA article, as there is simply not enough information out there for such a minor staffer. The page might be misleading when it mentions President Clinton, who was on the campaign trail, and thus talking to anyone and praising any and all potential voters, even minor school staffers.Zigzig20s (talk) 15:26, 23 October 2014 (UTC)
- How does USA Today "title" make the article read like an advertisement/self-promotion? Can you point to specific sentences or areas that make it look like this article is being used to promote him? If you can we can fix that, this is not a reason to delete the whole article. If you google 'Bob Shannon' other people show up earlier in the list. This Bob Shannon shows up for me on the second page and again on the fourth page of results. The location within the results have nothing to do with how notable someone is. If you just add the word 'football' to the search there are lots of hits on the first page. Not having all the information someone would want about a person in the article does not make them non-notable. That is not a reason to delete an article. Will this article ever become a GA, probably not. Right now a little over 0.6% of the articles are GA or above. Will 70% of the articles on Wikipedia ever become GAs, probably not. Does that mean that we should delete all those articles because they will never become GA? Finally, what is misleading about the statements made in regards to the 53 Faces of Hope and Bill Clinton? The small paragraph reports what the sources say. Have you read the sources to see if it is misleading? Have you read any of the sources used in the article? GB fan 17:09, 23 October 2014 (UTC)
- Keep I dont think there is any strong point in deleting it.AmRit GhiMire 'Ranjit' (talk) 14:25, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
- Keep: We have a five year old template suggesting each of these "coach of the year" coaches are likely notable. Nomination is simply incorrect in claiming he is a "Local High School football coach with no notable national coverage whatsoever. Credit to GB fan for improving article.
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. GB fan 02:48, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of American football-related deletion discussions. GB fan 18:47, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Illinois-related deletion discussions. GB fan 18:47, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
Good article discussions
- Peer review
- A-Class review