Talk:La Salle Green Hills
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
|
||
|
Contents |
[edit] Short name
What's the shortname for La Salle Green Hills? La Salle? LSGH? La Salle GH? What? --Howard the Duck 10:11, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
- LSGH. --Mithril Cloud 14:22, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
LSGH...
[edit] Failed "good article" nomination
This article failed good article nomination. This is how the article, as of July 14, 2007, compares against the six good article criteria:
- 1. Well written?: No, it contains too many lists. In fact, the article looks like one long list. There are a lot of one sentcence subsections. As a result its table of contents is too overwhelming. So the layout should be changed to comply with WP:LAYOUT and in particular with Wikipedia:Embedded_list. For instance, many lists can moved into separate articles. The leading section is too short. It should be 3-4 paragraphes long (see WP:LEAD).
- 2. Factually accurate?: Difficult to access since the article has only five references in the list; two of the them (1 and 5) link to the school's web site. Refs 2-4 are strange because they don't provided names of publishers, dates of publications, ISDNs and other information. Are they books, journal articles or something different? Where can they be found? The inline citations are almost absent. I noticed them only in two paragraphs.
- 3. Broad in coverage?: May be. I'm not sure because the references are sparse.
- 4. Neutral point of view?: The same as previous.
- 5. Article stability? Yes
- 6. Images?: OK
When these issues are addressed, the article can be resubmitted for consideration. If you feel that this review is in error, feel free to take it to a GA review. Thank you for your work so far. — Ruslik 12:52, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
[edit] GA Review comments
- The tone of the article needs to be cleaned up quite a lot.
- In particular, the Kundirana and the Drama club are written in an encyclopedic tone.
- Many sections do not appear to have a source and might be based on the author's personal expereince
- Lack of 3rd party refs. Most are from the school itself or the Church organisation which runs it. If there are no 3rd party refs then the info needs to be culled or the content cannot be regarded for GA. This has caused a large neutrality problem.
- What is the source for the alumni?
- What are the academic results of this school? how does it rank? what policy changes have happened in 50 years? Hardly any history is there at all.
Blnguyen (bananabucket) 09:19, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
Got it. I`ll try to fix these problems. Thanks. - Gebherbosa
[edit] GA Nomination
Okay, it says that this article tried out 2 times for GA. I fixed the article up and let's see if it'll pass, hope it will.
- Skrulls (talk) 14:17, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] GA Review
This review is transcluded from Talk:La Salle Green Hills/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review. GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
Review by Epicadam (talk) 16:16, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
- Is it reasonably well written?
- A. Prose quality:
- Run-on sentences are problems like "The educational work of the Brothers in the Philippines started when nine Brothers from Marseilles, France arrived in Manila on March 29, 1911 upon invitation of the American Archbishop of Manila, Jeremias J. Harty, himself an alumnus of a De La Salle High School in the United States, to establish a college, the De La Salle College." There are also some problems with tenses and subject-verb agreement such as "La Salle Green Hills also undergone accreditation and have had exemplary results when the school is evaluated by the Philippine Accrediting Association of Schools, Colleges and Universities in 1972, 1974, 1977 (after a 3 year accreditation grant), 1982, 1987 (both receiving 5 year grants), all of these visits were given clean accreditations making the only high school to do such."
- B. MoS compliance:
- Dates are not properly linked, and acronyms are used without first providing its full name like "PAASCU." Terms are also used which would not be understood by Wikipedia users who are unfamiliar with the topic. For example, I am unfamiliar with "survey form B," "Securities and Exchange Commission" (I doubt you're referring to the U.S. government agency by the same name), "NAMFREL," "football" (on this wiki, the term must be differentiated between American football and what is also known as soccer), etc.
- A. Prose quality:
- Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
- A. References to sources:
- B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
- Many sections and paragraphs do not have citations.
- C. No original research:
- OR seems to be present especially in "The Campus" section.
- Is it broad in its coverage?
- A. Major aspects:
- B. Focused:
- The article is broad but not focused. Editors have to think about what is truly important information to add to the article. Every fact must answer the question, "Would anybody else care about this?" For example, is it necessary for people in South Africa and India to know which building houses the cafeteria? Probably not.
- Is it neutral?
- Is it stable?
- Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
- A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
- B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
- The seal is the most prominent symbol on the page, along with three pictures of campus buildings. I'm not sure pictures of the pool and soccer field are extremely important; they could really be pictures of any swimming pool and any soccer field. Best picture is the photo of the gym, which does have unusual architecture. That is the kind of information that people might be interested in, as it is very much out of the ordinary.
- Overall:
- Pass or Fail:
- I recognize the work that has gone into this article; however, there are a number of style, MoS, citation and focusing issues that must be worked out before article can achieve GA status. Example of great GA article on a private religious school is Presbyterian Ladies' College, Sydney.
- Pass or Fail: