Jump to content

Talk:Briarcliff High School/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing

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

Reviewer: Bobamnertiopsis (talk · contribs) 21:12, 2 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take this one!

Thanks.--ɱ (talk) 21:53, 2 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Good Article review progress box
Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV ()
3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant ()
Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

First readthrough

[edit]

1A

[edit]
  • "As Briarcliff's student population expanded, the Law Park location did." Did what? Also expanded? If that's the case, consider "The Law Park location continued to expand along with Briarcliff's growing student population."
fixed.--ɱ (talk) 21:53, 2 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Even though the high school thus had more room at the Grade School, the population grew enough for the necessity of a new building." Confusing wording; the thus feels unnecessary and the for the necessity isn't as causal as it could be. How's this? "In spite of the newly empty space in the Grade School building, the high school population's continued growth necessitated the construction of a new structure."
implemented, thanks.--ɱ (talk) 21:53, 2 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Plans were delayed until the 1960s, when Briarcliff had plans to purchase..." Two uses of plans very close to each other; consider a synonym.
done.--ɱ (talk) 21:53, 2 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Not necessary, but consider using the convert template to contextualize "35 acres" or "55 acres" for those unfamiliar with the unit.
Was implementing as I read it, only to see you recommend it too. Done.--ɱ (talk) 21:53, 2 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • "adjoining to" → "adjoining"
okay, done.--ɱ (talk) 21:53, 2 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • "permanent-storage" Is the hyphen necessary?
for description of the building, it's preferable for distinction over a permanent building used for storage.--ɱ (talk) 21:53, 2 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • "As of 2013, the high school's track and grass football field are being replaced" You might think about changing this to "were being replaced" or just "were replaced" if it's done now.
fixed.--ɱ (talk) 21:53, 2 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • "the track will be completed in mid-July and the artificial turf baseball and hockey fields by Labor Day." Any updates?
fixed.--ɱ (talk) 21:53, 2 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • "it includes plans to upgrade the main entrance doors, construct vestibules and greeter stations." Remove the comma, replace with and.
done.--ɱ (talk) 21:53, 2 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Might the single sentence about the newspaper be slipped chronologically into the history where appropriate?
It's not pretty, but done.--ɱ (talk) 21:53, 2 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • "fifth-wealthiest school district in the United States, and the third-wealthiest in New York" No comma needed.
ok, fixed.--ɱ (talk) 21:53, 2 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • In the second external link, italicize The Briarcliff Bulletin.
done.--ɱ (talk) 21:53, 2 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Decide whether to use the serial comma (a, b, and c) or not (a, b and c) and standardize throughout.
Where did you see examples of no serial commas? It's hard to spot them, and I should've used them in all cases...--ɱ (talk) 21:53, 2 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I'll check again soon and point out any specific instances. BobAmnertiopsis∴ChatMe! 00:00, 3 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know why I thought I saw a lack of serial commas. I reread and found no lack of them. Apologies! BobAmnertiopsis∴ChatMe! 20:39, 3 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Not a GA requirement, but "Centennial Variety Show (April 26-27, 2002)" and "from March 7–9, 2014" use different dashes. I believe the latter is the correct one to use in both situations. Feel free to change it if you'd like.
done.--ɱ (talk) 21:05, 3 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

1B

[edit]
  • Would it make more sense to arrange Theater, Sports, and Courses as Courses, Theater, and Sports or Courses, Sports, and Theater? That way, the Sports section's box wouldn't clutter the Courses section's, and the emphasis is on academics, which might reasonably the first focus in an article about a non-performing arts school.
For a public school, they exert most of their efforts on the performing arts and like to showcase it, it's a point of pride more than academics or sports. Still, I largely organized it based on how the very annoying tables would format, and I'm still not happy with it. And the sports table will always crowd another section; it's very long and the writing in the sports section is very short.--ɱ (talk) 21:53, 2 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • There's a lot of information in the lead that can be found nowhere else in the article body, including student/faculty ratio, who the principal is, and the second sentence of the third paragraph. See commentary in 3A re broadness.
Lead info not in the body below has only been a problem because people would stick info into the lead that didn't have a source and say it's OK because info in the lead doesn't need a source. But in the high school article, the information in the lead is sourced. As well, I considered putting administration and other details in its own section, but that section would be very short, and it would leave the lead short too.--ɱ (talk) 00:30, 3 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, the lead is one of the few immutable GA criteria...it needs to be reexamined before I can pass this article. Basically, it should summarize the key points of the article below. Currently, it lacks anything about the school's history. Conversely, info such as that the school offers AP classes and University in the High School courses is only found in the lead and should be mentioned elsewhere below first. My advice: take everything not covered elsewhere in the article from the lead and put it in the body of the article, then wait until the end of the review and only then do a rewrite. BobAmnertiopsis∴ChatMe! 03:50, 3 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Most school articles do put a lot of the aspects/overview items in the lead; I think an 'overview' section would be kind-of awkward, and certainly very short. I did add a short history summary to the lead.--ɱ (talk) 20:09, 3 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I'd really love to see something akin to the Enrollment section of Johnson Senior High School (Saint Paul, Minnesota), which passed GA. Maybe an Administration and enrollment section to cover the principal/vice principal and any other pertinent elements of administration you come across, in addition to such info as the number of faculty members (as mentioned in the infobox), the student:faculty ratio, and the rest of the enrollment info from the lead. It needn't be long. BobAmnertiopsis∴ChatMe! 20:44, 3 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure that demographic data like that exists for the high school alone.... I put some other information in. Administration really doesn't fit in with enrollment, plus most HS articles I've come across do list such information like prinicipals and vice principals in the lead.--ɱ (talk) 21:24, 3 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Alright! BobAmnertiopsis∴ChatMe! 01:12, 4 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

2A

[edit]
  • You use a couple of book sources in your refs. I would really like to see page numbers, but I don't believe GA requires it, so if it's too much trouble, that's alright.
OK. Sometime in the future when I am back in town and have access to the books, I'll do that.--ɱ (talk) 00:14, 3 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yup, no worries. This will pass GA regardless of whether you do it or not but there's a lot of info in the first two paragraphs of the History section and it would be helpful to be able to more easily pinpoint it from within the source book. BobAmnertiopsis∴ChatMe! 03:45, 3 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • I would, however, love to see a standardization of how you use locations in book sources. You use "West Kennebunk, Maine", "Cornwall N.Y", and, in the case of Marc Weingarten's book, no location at all. My personal style is to basically follow what the relevant articles use, so that if the Weingarten book is published in New York City, I'll use New York City as the location as per its article, whereas with smaller cities, I'll do Cornwall, NY per its article and likewise West Kennebunk, ME. Of course, it's up to you to pick a style you like, just make sure it's consistent.
Good catch, fixed to my usual standard.--ɱ (talk) 00:14, 3 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Awesome. Can we get a location on the Weingarten book too? BobAmnertiopsis∴ChatMe! 03:45, 3 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
done.--ɱ (talk) 05:04, 3 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Would you mind formatting ref 27 in a way consistent with other archived URL refs (25, 29)?
done.--ɱ (talk) 20:17, 3 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

2B

[edit]
  • Looks good.

2C

[edit]
  • I'd like to see sources for the several alumni who aren't currently sourced, namely Tom Ortenberg and Michael Azerrad.
Both were on an uncited list of alumni long before I even touched the article. Ortenberg I had found was born and raised in Briarcliff Manor (source), so assuming good faith and using logical reasoning, there's no reason to doubt it... As well, I found that Azerrad's father lives in Briarcliff Manor, which means Azerrad likely grew up here and therefore attended the school (source). Nothing's very definitive, but it's not worth removal due to its overwhelmingly strong likelyhood.--ɱ (talk) 05:04, 3 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Alright, that's fine. Also, you might consider adding Bobby Blevins who, according to his article, attended BHS. BobAmnertiopsis∴ChatMe! 14:16, 3 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Forgot about that, I actually wrote his article.--ɱ (talk) 15:40, 3 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
done.--ɱ (talk) 20:09, 3 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]


3A

[edit]
  • Aside from information in the lead (see 1B) about the administration and academics that's nowhere to be found in the rest of the article, there's a lack of any sort of demographic information. I saw at least some listed in some of the US News and World or Newsweek HS ranking sources, and it would be great if you could incorporate that into the article, either in a new section or by transitioning the Courses section into one inclusive of both the courses and information about academics/demographics. Work it how you will!
The high school and school district have virtually identical demographics, so instead of putting a demographics section on each school article, I thought it better to just place one in the school district article. As well, the state Education Department publishes those district demographics. I don't trust Newsweek or US News and World for their statistics, they've often been off with regard to schools. And as far as I can tell, there's no guide to school articles like WikiProject Cities has for municipalities, nor any GA or FA secondary school article to use as a precedent, so I believe what sections should/must be included is pretty flexible.--ɱ (talk) 00:30, 3 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, works for me. BobAmnertiopsis∴ChatMe! 03:39, 3 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • The infobox lists a tuition cost. I don't think I've ever encountered a public school that charges tuition before...this would be something to elaborate on.
I'll look into mentioning this a bit better. Children within the school district boundaries get to attend free charge (though taxes are high), while students from other districts have to pay the tuition fee. I did mention that historically, students as far as Granite Springs would come to the school for education (and would pay tuition). Any student living outside of the district would pay tuition, including those in neighboring Pocantico Hills. Contemporarily, it seems most tuition students are from that school district, which lacks a high school.--ɱ (talk) 05:12, 3 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Would you mind making some mention of that in the body of the article somewhere? Just because it seems atypical for a public school, it seems to merit inclusion in the body. You might also append the infobox with a parenthetical, like Tuition $13,800 (out-of-district students only) or some such thing. BobAmnertiopsis∴ChatMe! 01:11, 4 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
OK, done. Does that look fine?--ɱ (talk) 04:44, 4 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Love it. Good use of notes. BobAmnertiopsis∴ChatMe! 05:12, 4 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

3B

[edit]
  • Looks good.

4

[edit]
  • Looks alright.

5

[edit]
  • No problems here.

6a

[edit]
  • All images are either free or are tagged with FURs.

6b

[edit]
  • I question how necessary it is to have File:BriarcliffHSlogo.png. Its FUR claims it exists to "serve as the primary means of visual identification at the top of the article dedicated to the entity in question" but File:BHSshieldlogo.svg seems to have superseded it in that duty and, frankly, does a much better job. The non-shield logo is just the district's logo plus the words High School. Do you have a reason for maintaining both? My suggestion is to delete the former file in favor of the much more interesting (and vector!) shield logo. What are your thoughts?
I've often objected to the assumption that so many editors have: that there can only be one non-free image per article. I have yet to see a problem with it or a rule against it. Still, that's my general opinion. Specifically, I don't really care about the logo. It doesn't do much, you're right.--ɱ (talk) 05:16, 3 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, heavens, no, I don't think there should be any sort of prohibition on the number of unfree images in a given article...I just think that their presence must be strongly justified (more so than free images) and that the logo image really adds nothing to the article except clutter. The shield logo is cool! The other logo...meh. BobAmnertiopsis∴ChatMe! 05:23, 3 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
okay, done.--ɱ (talk) 05:29, 3 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your flexibility! BobAmnertiopsis∴ChatMe! 05:38, 3 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I will be back to finish this review later and/or tomorrow. BobAmnertiopsis∴ChatMe! 21:12, 2 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thanks for your help so far.--ɱ (talk) 21:55, 2 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I've done a first readthrough. Some things to do yet, but this article is pretty close to GA status. Good work on this one! BobAmnertiopsis∴ChatMe! 04:03, 3 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

After reviewing the article once more, I'm happy to Pass it! Good work quickly resolving issues! All the best, BobAmnertiopsis∴ChatMe! 05:18, 4 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help!--ɱ (talk) 05:29, 4 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Briarcliff_High_School/GA1&oldid=1136300903"