Talk:Hatfield College, Durham/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Bait30 (talk · contribs) 02:59, 7 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take this on. Bait30 ^{Talk 2 me pls?} 02:59, 7 March 2021 (UTC) I'm sorry, but I'm going to have to quickfail this. Here's some of the reasons why:[reply]

Well written

The lead has lots of issues a per MOS:LEAD
- For example, it does a poor job at MOS:PARA. Of the five paragraphs in the lead, three are one sentence, one is two sentences, and the other is three sentences.
- MOS:LEADREL: a practise later introduced at Keble College, Oxford and eventually worldwide. This sentence isn't cited and the info is not found anywhere else in the body. A£5 million refurbishment to the Jevons building, including the bar and student accommodation, was unveiled in October 2018. This isn't mentioned anywhere in the body so it seems very unnecessary for the lead.
The "See also" section should not have internal links per MOS:SEEALSO.

Verifiable with no original research

The "Academic dress" and "Grace" sections are completely unsourced.
There are issues with many of the refs.
- A lot of the refs are WP:PRIMARY or not WP:INDEPENDENT.
  - For example: "Hatfield SCR". Durham University. Retrieved 20 March 2020.
  - The first paragraph of the "Student body" section is based entirely on primary, self-published sources. That means that the final sentence of the paragraph WP:SYNTHESIS.
  - The first paragraph of the "Admissions" section is entirely based on primary, self-published sources. Again, SYNTHESIS.
  - This is still higher than many Oxbridge Colleges: this is SYNTHESIS
- All the links from https://community.dur.ac.uk/ are dead.
- Using the Wayback Machine, I was able to determine that the only source that is used in the first paragraph of the "Dunham Court" section doesn't even contain the word "Dunham".

These are just some of the issues I found after a cursory look into the article. In my opinion, the quality of the lead and the issues with the refs are just too much. I'm sorry to do this, and I hope this doesn't stop you from improving the article further and eventually getting it to GA status. Bait30 ^{Talk 2 me pls?} 05:40, 7 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]