Talk:Oxford College of Emory University/GA1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

GA Review[edit]

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Edge3 (talk · contribs) 18:16, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

Hello! Here's my preliminary review. A more complete review will follow once these issues are addressed:

  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
    The last paragraph of the lead section (about the Oxford Historic District) has a citation. While WP:LEADCITE does not prohibit citations in the lead section, this one seems to be unnecessary. On a related note, the entire lead section should be a summary of content that can be found elsewhere in the article. See WP:MOSINTRO. Please add summaries on academics, student life, and other sections to the lead. Make sure that the part about the campus in the Oxford Historic District is expanded upon in the rest of the article.
    Those sections are summarized in paragraph three of the lead, although I can't really think of how to expand paragraph three without unnecessary redundancy. I will do some research and add more about the "Oxford Historic District" in the History section.
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
    I'll look at the sources more closely once the other issues are addressed.
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
    Would a separate section about the campus layout and buildings be useful, or is that sufficiently covered in other sections?
    I can't say most university articles place a lot of emphasis on campus layout or buildings, but I believe this could be expanded on in some of the sections. I'll look into it.
    I created a short section about this based off of some information I found.
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
    A lot of content was recently removed by User:Jaimejose.
    I reviewed his content removal and have decided that it was not done in good faith, and have for the time being reverted it. I have left a note on his talk page requesting an explanation.
  6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
    Please clarify the justifications for public domain status of File:Bishopjohnemory.jpg and File:Jamesdickey.jpg on their image description pages.
    I did so for James Dickey's portrait. I hope that is satisfactory. I could not find any documentation of the origins of the John Emory image, and because of his age, it is highly likely that the picture is in the public domain. However, I don't think this can be proven, so I have removed it for now.
  7. Overall:
    I'll place this on hold for now. Overall, good job!

Thank you for taking up the review of this article! I have done some quick fixes, but I will be unavailable for the next few days. I apologize for the terrible timing, but it can't be helped. I'll return to address the rest of your concerns in a few days. Thanks! --haha169 (talk) 01:08, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

No worries. I have this page on my watchlist, and I look forward to your next round of edits. Edge3 (talk) 01:18, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

All right, so I added a new campus section like you asked and also went through the toolbox and fixed the dead refs and dab links. I'll tackle expanding the lead next, although I am not too sure how to go about that yet. --haha169 (talk) 21:54, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! I apologize for being slow on the review... I've had quite a lot of work to do for class. I'll try to add more comments within the next few days. Edge3 (talk) 03:33, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Apologies for the delay. I have some more comments to make:

Lead section
  • "the birthplace and one of nine academic divisions of Emory University" — I recommend splitting this. Maybe you could mention that it's the "birthplace" in a different part of the lead?
  • "Men's and Women's tennis teams" — I think you can use lowercase letters for "men's" and "women's"
  • "from a wide variety of religious, ethnic, and geographic backgrounds, including over 38 states and 20 foreign countries" — Not supported by the source. Maybe you wanted ref 40? [1]
    • Done, thanks for taking the extra step and finding the correct cite for me!
  • "one of the first acts of the new student body was the founding of a debate society on campus" — Was this debate society called "Phi Gamma"? You should make that clear in the beginning. You only introduce Phi Gamma Hall as the name of a building, not a society.
  • "It was not until the summer of 1865 that the campus was able to fully return to its academic functions, when it reopened with twenty students and three professors" — The source says 1866, not 1865?
  • "president of the Coca-Cola Company" — Link to The Coca-Cola Company?
    • Done, except for the last one. I have a question about multiple wikilinking - shouldn't a word usually be linked only on its first occurrence unless used again in an infobox?
      • Yes, you're correct. I just checked WP:REPEATLINK, which says that the additional link is not needed.
  • Source has been updated for the new semester, I've updated the article too. Thanks for the catch.
    • Please remove "currently" as per WP:CURRENTLY. I recommend using the phrase "as of Fall 2012" or something similar. eh... I suppose I could do it myself. This is the only remaining issue, so I won't let it delay the GA process any further.
  • "Oxford College enrolled 936 students for the 2011–12 academic year, with an average class size of 21 students. 29% of the students enrolled are Asian/Pacific Islanders, 14% are African American, and 6% are Latino." — Please update these statistics
  • Done
  • " SAT scores ranging from 600–700 in Critical Reading, and 620–720 in mathematics" — Math scores are not consistent with the source. Also, did you want to include the writing scores?
    • Fixed Math. The writing SAT is usually included for the full composite score but looking at other FA university articles I don't see the writing SAT score used in very many of them.
  • "while an additional 242 students received academic merit scholarships" — I'm not sure whether the source indicates that the 242 students were in addition to those who received financial aid. It's possible that these students received both merit scholarships and financial aid.
    • Good point. Rewrote "an additional" to "and a total of".
Student Life
  • "There is a Student Activities Commission Club Fair, where both clubs set up booths." — First, I'm not sure whether this fair is noteworthy. Second, what do you mean by "both clubs"? I don't see two clubs mentioned here.
    • Not sure. Sentence sounds awkward and is a poor fit, I removed it.
  • "Dooley takes his first name and middle initial from the current president of Emory University." — I would provide the name of this president. Also, you should avoid language like "current", since this article is supposed to be relevant even in the future when this president is no longer in office. Lastly, what "middle initial" are we talking about?
    • "Current" as in current whenever the page is being read. If the current President leaves and is succeeded by another president, Dooley changes his name correspondingly. I'll change "current" to "sitting" to correct that confusion.
Notable alumni

Looking forward to your edits. Again, I apologize for the delay in responding to you. I'll try my best to be more prompt in reviewing this article. Edge3 (talk) 05:15, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the suggestions! I really appreciate you checking the cites and making sure things match up, that was really helpful. I'll finish up the rest of them soon. --haha169 (talk) 00:46, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for addressing my comments! I'm satisfied with the result, and I've decided to pass this GA nomination. Congratulations! Edge3 (talk) 05:37, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for reviewing this article! You were really thorough but very helpful as well! And flexible with my busy schedule. Thanks again! --haha169 (talk) 23:42, 9 February 2013 (UTC)