Talk:Durham School of the Arts

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject United States / North Carolina / Durham (Rated B-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject North Carolina (marked as Low-importance).
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject North Carolina - Durham (marked as Low-importance).
WikiProject Schools (Rated B-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is related to WikiProject Schools, a collaborative effort to write quality articles about schools around the world. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
Former good article nominee Durham School of the Arts was a good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There are suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
Date Process Result
August 16, 2007 Peer review Reviewed
November 2, 2007 Good article nominee Not listed
Current status: Former good article nominee

AP stuff[edit]

what is lit. and comp.? They are under AP English IV. Abbreviations are difficult to understand. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jonwilliamsl (talkcontribs)

Well, "lit" should be "Literature", but I'm not sure what "comp" means.. --Molotovnight 14:07, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
"comp" refers to composition --jabrd 10:35, 5 March 2010 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jabrd (talkcontribs)


This is a good start. Lacks pictures. References are started but could be inline. No alumni listed. One claim to fame is the 2005 story which is good. But more history? A picture of the production/ protest would be good. Start could be a "B". Mid is only just.... tell us more Victuallers 15:36, 20 May 2007 (UTC)


This article has greatly improved since i last visited, I have edited to include more current events. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Toxictwelve (talkcontribs) 05:55, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Good article nomination on hold[edit]

This article's Good Article promotion has been put on hold. During review, some issues were discovered that can be resolved without a major re-write. This is how the article, as of October 25, 2007, compares against the six good article criteria:

1. Well written?: Symbol wait.svg A few things need fixing. The grammar is sometimes very repetitive (example:"Durham High School was a high school for whites in the city of Durham"). I'd like a general review of the prose specifically considering this aspect, and I'll try and help out by doing some myself. Considering there is only one entry, the Notable alumni section should probably be integrated somewhere else or removed. Having entire sections for small bulleted lists without accompanying prose is undesirable unless a list is clearly necessary. In this spirit, Past Principals should be integrated with History (isn't that what it is part of?). Same goes with a few other sections. most of Recent Events should be a subsection of History. However, Construction should be a part of the Campus section, which is pretty thin right now.
2. Factually accurate?: Symbol wait.svg This is big problem area. First off, the article is lacking in inline citations. Some sections - History, Middle school, and Vandalism - have no citations whatsoever. The bare minimum of inline refs is one at the end of each paragraph and for quotations (especially quotations). Also helpful is a ref for any claim likely to be challenged. Per the preceding comments, a major increase in the amount of inline referencing needs to occur.
3. Broad in coverage?: Symbol wait.svg The introduction, per the guidelines of WP:LEAD, needs major expansion. A lead section should be a precise overview of the entire article, not just a definition of the subject and a mention of how students are enrolled. Most surprisingly, this article has little to no coverage of the content and type of arts education. The Classes section needs to be significantly expanded to distinguish the style and content of arts education at Durham.
4. Neutral point of view?: Symbol support vote.svg Fair and equal treatment given to all significant points of view.
5. Article stability? Symbol support vote.svg Not the subject of any recent or on-going edit wars.
6. Images?: Symbol wait.svg All of the images now present have licenses but no sources given (if they were self-made this must be noted).

Please address these matters soon and then leave a note here showing how they have been resolved. After 48 hours the article should be reviewed again. If these issues are not addressed within 7 days, the article may be failed without further notice. Thank you for your work so far. — VanTucky Talk 19:03, 25 October 2007 (UTC)


For ease of reading, please place any questions or comments on the requested improvements below, rather than in the review itself. Thanks, VanTucky Talk

Okay, thanks so much for reviewing it, I'll see what I can do --Mr.crabby (Talk) 20:42, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
I will say though that most of my edits will be on Sunday and Monday, so don't be surprised if the article looks the saem tommorrow. --Mr.crabby (Talk) 23:39, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
I'm in no hurry. As long as you complete all the necessary changes within a week, the article will pass. VanTucky Talk 23:53, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
VanTucky, when you get the chance can you evaluate lead and how well it written again? I've tried to make improvements. Thanks again for all your help! --Mr.crabby (Talk) 23:22, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
The introduction is better, but there is still a lot more citation work needed. Nice job on expanding the Campus section, but in addition to the ones I mention in the review, each of the paragraphs of that section needs at least one citation at the end (of each paragraph). VanTucky Talk 00:56, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
Okay, I'm still gathering information and sources, I do appreciate your help though. Thnaks again! --Mr.crabby (Talk) 03:29, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
Unfortunatly things have come up and I am unable to take the time right now to turn DSA into a GA. I apologize for this and appreciate your help. Eventually, I will make the changes you recommended and renominate this. Thanks so much though, I really appreciate your help VanTucky! All the best --Mr.crabby (Talk) 02:22, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for your forthrightness. Please feel free to renominate the article once you have completed the requested improvements. Happy editing, VanTucky Talk 23:56, 2 November 2007 (UTC)