Talk:Educational psychology/GA2

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Khazar2 (talk · contribs) 02:19, 22 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi 69.248.115.128, thanks for your nomination of this important topic. I hope this gets to GA, but a glance at the page makes me wonder if this nomination's a bit premature. There's a proposed merge that still needs to be resolved, and it looks like there's some material that needs to be followed by inline citations that still doesn't have them. Examples:

Stats:

"The most highly cited journals related to educational psychology are currently Child Development, Educational Psychologist, and Journal of Educational Psychology."
"The percentage of female authors of peer-reviewed journal articles doubled from 1976 (24%) to 1995 (51%), and has since remained constant. Female membership on educational psychology journal editorial boards increased from 17% in 1976 to 47% in 2004. Over the same period, the proportion of chief editor positions held by women increased from 22% to 70%."

Quotes:

"During the time of The Enlightenment, Pestalozzi's ideals introduced "educationalisation." This created the bridge between social issues and education by introducing the idea of social issues to be solved through education. Horlacher describes the most prominent example of this during The Enlightenment to be ″improving agricultural production methods.″

Also, the entire "Education and training" subsection is uncited, raising concerns that it's original research. Another small odd moment is that the list of "technological resources" includes two people (who presumably aren't androids, though that would be awesome). Finally, the lead doesn't appear to adequately summarize the article, as it doesn't even touch on the very long history section.

I don't mean to be discouraging--it'd be terrific to see this as a GA, and I hope you continue to work on it. It's just that you'll need to take care of some of the more obvious issues first (the full GA criteria can be found at WP:GA? for reference), and so I'm closing this for now. Please feel free to renominate as soon as these issues are addressed (or sooner, if you'd like a second opinion).

Good luck, and just let me know if you have any questions! -- Khazar2 (talk) 02:19, 22 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]