Talk:Bowling Green State University/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Cupco (talk · contribs) 19:22, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	The very first string from the article I googled was a copyvio from [1], which shows other copyvios in surrounding sentences. Please paraphrase and check the remainder of the article for plagiarism. I am unable to find any remaining copyright violations. The prose is very readable, with mostly concise sentences and great readability throughout.
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	Two small lists, which could be improved if they were made multi-column to save whitespace, but no major and no other minor issues. I columnized the lists.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.	Randomly selected excerpts were verifiable.
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).	Sources for all notable alumni, presidents, etc. No controversies that I can see.
	2c. it contains no original research.	As far as I can tell. No exceptional claims.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.	There is no information on graduation/attrition rates or crime rates on campus, both of which are items of interest to prospective students. Tuition costs, financial aid availability, and similar statistics are also worth including. Have a look at a printed college directory and try to make sure you have all the statistics that they list. Have there really been no notable controversies or times when the university was shown in a bad light in the press? Thank you, the tuition and graduation rates make it seem much less like a public relations brochure. I was unable to find any mention of crime on campus or major controversies, either. The few minor controversies I did find would have BLP issues if they were included, so forget that.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).	Lengthy but not overly so.
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.	~~Withholding judgement.~~ See 3a above. It still seems somewhat like a marketing brochure, but I can not find any reliable sources with which to do anything about it. Hope for a faculty sex scandal if you plan to try to make it through FAC.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.	Dashboard looks fine.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.	Sampled a handful, all ok.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	Very nice photos.
	7. Overall assessment.	On hold for two weeks to allow time to address copyright, comprehensiveness, and possible neutrality concerns. Cupco 19:57, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply] ✓ Pass Listed. Cupco 22:04, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

GA Reply

Cupco- Thanks for the GA review!

Reply to 1A, Copy vio: I'm not sure how those facts on the nickname escaped myself, peer review, and copyedit. I think it may have been paraphrased but not enough. I reworked the wording and paraphrased better, please have a look at those sentences and see if it suits you better. I believe that was toward the top of the Early growth and development section

Reply to 3A, Coverage: I agree the grad/attrition rates and tuition are missing. I'll work on putting together that information this evening, there's some good data here: http://nces.ed.gov/collegenavigator/?q=Bowling+Green+State&s=all&id=201441#retgrad and I'll look to bring in a cpl more reliable sources as well. I'm a little weary of adding crime data and have not seen it included in other GA and Featured university-related articles. According to the data, BG's campus is one of the safer ones for a larger university but I haven't found articles to that, safe campus awards, etc... really anything notable regarding campus safety. http://nces.ed.gov/collegenavigator/?q=Bowling+Green+State&s=all&id=201441#crime Also, other than no notable murders or crimes, I have not seen anything on big/notable controversies. The only thing I can think of, occurred while I was on business in Toledo in early Aug. BGSU demolished a 1920s kit home that held staff offices. It was not on a historic registrar and had been modified so much, the university argued it was not representative of a kit home and basically beyond repair or additional renovations. http://www.toledoblade.com/Education/2012/07/31/BGSU-building-supporters-gather-to-protest-demolition.html http://www.sent-trib.com/front-page/updated-demolition-of-pop-culture-house-begins If the property is used for a new health center, some mention of the site and the house could be added, but I personally wouldn't call it a notable controversy. Bhockey10 (talk) 21:13, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That's cool. Take your time to google at least a few excerpts from each section please -- when I was looking at verifiability there were definitely some other very close paraphrases (but I didn't make a note of them, sorry.) If you want me to check back before the full 14 days, just say so on my talk page when you're ready. Cupco 21:21, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the extra work to clear up those issues. ✓ Pass Congratulations! Cupco 22:08, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, for the review! It's a nice honor after myself and some of the other regular editors put it extensive work toward the GA status. Cheers and happy editing! Bhockey10 (talk) 00:37, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]