Talk:Rosenstiel School of Marine, Atmospheric, and Earth Science/GA2

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Arctic Night 02:32, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'm undertaking a review of this article at the moment and will provide some general comments here. I will provide my adjudication once all of those comments have been given. Arctic Night 02:33, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The lead of this article needs to be much longer - see WP:LEAD. Lead sections should be a general overview of the article. - done
The first paragraph of the History section is not sourced. It needs to be. - done
Parts of the 'Description' section need to be sourced. - I am working on the sourcing of the "Academics" section.
Your referencing is, while not fantastic when it comes to sourcing every single item in the article, very consistent, and I commend this article's editors on this. It's always great to see the use of the cite- templates, and no 'free styling' is present as far as I can see!
The entire article needs a good copy-edit. While I have done a little copy-editing during the course of my review, there are a few spots where there isn't a comma and there should be, etc. Some sentences should also be reworded for flow - try to cut down on the use of brackets. I know brackets are only used rarely in this article, but when they are used, it does disrupt flow.
Please explain specific terms when you use them. "actuated by the Dade delegation" makes no sense to me, as I do not know what the Dade delegation is.

I have changed this a bit. It is widely known that a delegation is the set of legislators representing a particular area. For example, the Illinois delegation to Congress means all of the members of the House and Senate from the State of Illinois.

The History section needs a good wikilinking. There is only one wikilink in that entire section, while there are several things that could be wikilinked there. - done
The capitalisation of 'Gulf Oil Spill' should be constant. It isn't in this article. - I am standardizing on just Capital "G" because Gulf of Mexico is a proper name.
There are a lot of references in this article. I would recommend separating the references into two columns - there is a template to do this, but I can't remember what it is.
I'm also a little concerned by the number of University of Miami sources in the article. Aren't there any more secondary sources you could use?

I will look again.

For the time being, I am going to put this article on hold for seven days to give editors a chance to come along and respond to the concerns I have highlighted here. If I do not receive a response within seven days, I will be left with no choice but to fail the article. If I do not respond myself after a reasonable period of time should you feel you have addressed these issues, please use the 'email me' function to contact me, as I often go offline for periods of time. Arctic Night 02:45, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I will get working on your concerns. Just as a reminder, the GA criteria do not require a footnote in each paragraph, just "provides in-line citations from reliable sources for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged" Thanks, Racepacket (talk) 04:12, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, but it is expected of GA nominations that they are fully sourced. I am not going to be able to pass it without more sources. Arctic Night 12:57, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

NB: Racepacket has been indefinitely blocked for copyvios,[1] including some in this article. So i suggest that you fail immediately. Jezhotwells (talk) 16:27, 6 February 2011 (UTC) User:Ryulong established that Jezhotwells' copying concern resulted from another website copying from this Wikipedia article. We shall restart the GA review process. Racepacket (talk) 00:14, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]