Wikipedia:Peer review/Activism at Ohio Wesleyan University/archive1

Activism at Ohio Wesleyan University

I created this article in early December in effort to move information on a specific topic from the main article on Ohio Wesleyan University and to eliminate a previous POV concern on the topic of Activism not being comprehensive of the University's history. I believe I addressed the POV concern by adding a comprehensive but brief overview of the school's history on the topic. Unexpetedly, due to its quality, this article was recognized as a "Did you know?" article in mid-December. I would like to receive constructive criticism on how to improve the quality of this article and to get it to a "Good article" status in the near future. LaSaltarella 01:04, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

• Please see automated peer review suggestions here. Thanks, APR _t 02:22, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

I think a section of quotes by Alumni / Alumnus and the context of the quotes would enhance the article and help attain good article status. Dharp66 21:46, 25 January 2007 (UTC)Dharp

• • Done. LaSaltarella 00:49, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

The lead sentence is the most important part of the article:

"Activism was embedded in the very vision for founding of Ohio Wesleyan University[1] and has played an important role in its history."

This lead sentence has a lovely rhetorical flourish, but it needs detail immediately after it to back it up, not just a citation. This would also address the automated peer review suggestion that the lead is too short. I would like to know, as part of the second and third sentences, what the founding vision consisted of (a written constitution? inaugural address? where would I look if I were hunting down the primary source?), and the detail of the activism I would find there. It needs to be a short, one-or-two line hook to get me reading the rest of the article to find out more. And then the history; the lead needs to give a taste of what is to come in the main body.Trishm 04:36, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

• Fixed. I provided more details with primary sources and expanded the lead.LaSaltarella 00:49, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
  • This is why I think the missionary activities from OWU are important. The university uses them to support this statement, but some editors with an anti-Christian bias want to exclude it because it doesn't fit their definition of activism. It may not be vogue today, but it was a major focus of the university early on and something the university boasts about on its webpage. Not to include it, with the university literature highlighting it, is IMHO, POV.Balloonman 08:26, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

requested review by balloonman

• "Slavery and the expansion of the United States were two of the most." Poorly worded, but worse, the reference cited doesn't mention Thomson... the fact that slavery/expansion were key issues at the time is a given---the fact that Thomson was active in their discussin is what needed to be cited.
• Transition to "Elizabeth Boynton Harbert" needs to be smoother, suddenly mentioning her as a notable alumn came out of the blue. Don't like her inclusion here for reasons discussed below.
• I still do not like the inclusion of Branch Rickey in the article. The article is on "Activism AT Ohio Wesleyan University." The article either needs to deal with people who are notable AT OWU or how OWU has an affect on people. Not alumni who later had profound affects on various issues. Rickey is one of the most importan figures in the 20th century, but the only way his (and others) inclusion in the article is (IMHO) accurate would be as a separate section entitled something along the lines of "Alumni Activism." Also, his inclusion is out of place chronologically/flow wise. The section needs to be introduced before introducing specific individuals.
• The paragraph on the war years does not mention anything related to activism, but rather historic events. There is nothing about students protesting or rising up to support the war--but rather an event that at the time was a given--men on campuses signed for the military. Nothing here makes it notable.
• The stuff on the WCSA and the sit in to get rid of ROTC is probably more of a reaction to vietnam, thus should it be included there?
• MUB = Memorial Union Building (spell it out.)
• "The Peoples Park" what housing issues were being protested? Were they issues such as segregation? Or were they issues that only the students cared about? If it wasn't something on a national level, it isn't notable.
• The source of Mary King is VERY VERY weak, find something stronger. One that supports the statement.
• "Reverend Martin Luther King frequently spoke in the U.S. against the South African government in the 1960s, urging Americans to end trade and investments in that country.[29] Following political activity by South Africa's blacks in 1985, the government declared a state of emergency.[30]" What does that paragraph have to do with OWU???
• The stuff on David Warren needs to be more rounded out... that paragraph is not well written.
• The stuff about being fully divested from South Africa in Feb 87 doesn't ring true. It was a huge issue when I went to school that fall and the following year---as indicated by the creation of the Committee on Divestment AFTER it supposedly divested. I suspect the cited source talks about campuses being divested, but doesn't list OWU specifically.
• 40 faculty members who cares... "Almost 1/3rd of the faculty members" now we're talking...
• I still believe the importance of missionaries in the early schools history needs to be included here. It is noteworthy enough that the school highlights it as part of its ongoing commitment to activism.
• Capitalization and grammar is a problem throughout the article---and if I can notice it, then it's pretty bad.Balloonman 08:35, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

PS I should mention that I didn't really feel any of the POV issues that I hated earlier on... I think you cleaned them up. I have quibbles over the missionary thing, but overall you've addressed most of my concerns.Balloonman 08:31, 5 February 2007 (UTC)