Talk:Westminster Christian Academy (Missouri)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Westminster Christian Academy (Missouri) was a good article nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There are suggestions below for improving the article. Once these are addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. Reviewed version: April 24, 2008

This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:

WikiProject Schools  (Rated B-Class / Low-Importance) This article is related to WikiProject Schools, an attempt 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 This article has been rated as B-Class on the assessment scale. Schools Portal Low This article has been rated as Low-Importance within Schools. WikiProject Missouri (Rated B-Class) Missouri Portal This article is part of WikiProject Missouri, a WikiProject related to the U.S. state of Missouri. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale. WikiProject St. Louis     (Rated B-Class) This article is within the scope of WikiProject St. Louis (Education), a project to build and improve articles related to St. Louis and the surrounding metropolitan area. We invite you to join the project and contribute to the discussion. B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale. Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

[edit] Advertisement

Why does Westminster's article reference the school as though the school authored the article? (e.g. "We" believe this and that) Its bias is so obvious that it stands out sharply from the rest of Wikipedia. I don't really want to change anyone's work without asking, but wouldn't just changing "we" to "Westminster" make the article read more like an encyclopedia entry and less like an advertisement? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnbish (talk • contribs) 02:15, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Just change it. That's the entire point of Wikipedia. And if you had specific concerns, I'm sure you could find a user who's edited this and ask them. Of course, as far as I'm concerned, the entire section can go as it has no true encyclopedic value. If you think it has merit, change the leadup to the quote, I just couldn't figure out how to phrase it. --jcarkeys 16:57, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] April 2008 GA Review

The requirements for a Good Article are as follows:

1. It is well written. In this respect:

• There is some awkward wording of the prose. For example, the first sentence of the History section seems awkward. “was opened?” Just “opened” by itself sounds more correct. Similar awkward wordings are found throughout the article and need to be corrected.
• Too many lists; the entire membership section and Courses subsection are nothing but lists. Lists are discouraged in GA and these sections should be converted to prose.
• The courses subsection mmediately jumps into the AP subsubsection. This is not appropriate usage of sections. You do not just jump from subsection to subsubsection.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable. In this respect, it:

• There are definitely not enough citations. I’ve added a few “citation needed” templates, but basically stopped after the History section because so many citations are needed. The intro and the first 2 sections after it as a total only have a total of three citations. All facts, statistics, statements need to be supported with citations from reliable sources. Please see WP:Cite and WP:Sources for more information.
• Several individuals listed as notable alumni do not have citations supporting the fact that they attended this school. Citations are needed or the individuals need to be removed.
• The currently included references are, for the most part, not correctly made. You need to include as much information as possible, include the author’s name, publication date, accession date, etc. etc.
• As a more recent note, upon thinking about it and reviewing the article again, a lot of the references are from the WCA website. The best references tend to be those written by third-parties (not-related to WCA, i.e., newspapers, magazines, etc.). Try and see if you can find more references to are independent from WCA. will381796 (talk) 16:35, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

3. It is broad in its coverage. In this respect, it:

• Yes.

4. Does the article maintain Neutrality?

• The last sentence of the “Athletics” section needs to be removed as POV, specifically the part about “football continues to give competition and will hopefully contest every district in the near future”.

5. It is stable. In this respect, it:

• For the past month this article has been under vandalism attacks by IP 75.128.169.83. These appear to all have been rapidly reverted. This is, however, a fairly common occurrence.
• There have been no recent edit wars

6. It is illustrated, where possible and appropriate, by images. In this respect:

• The article is illustrated with one photograph. It is allowable under the license through which it was released.
• It would be nice to see some additional photographs of the two different campuses and/or athletic teams, etc., but this is not a requirement for GA. Just a suggestion for the future.

In conclusion, with the article as it now stands, I am going to fail this article. There is a lot of work to be done with adding new references. Current references need to be corrected. Lists need to be converted to prose. General spell checking and grammar needs to be checked to ensure that the prose is well-written. This is too much to warrant a hold. But make these corrections and re-nominate. will381796 (talk) 02:58, 24 April 2008 (UTC)