Talk:University of Nottingham/GA1

GA Review

I've reviewed the article as a candidate for a good article, and have placed the nomination on hold for a period of one week. After a review of this article, I have the following comments:

1. This article is well written, and meets the GA requirements for prose, style and wiki-links. I've made a few changes when appropriate.
2. This article may need more citations in order to be a GA. Examples of areas laking appropriate citations:

   • In the "Campuses" section, the Jubilee Campus is described as "award-winning." What award has it won? Was the award notable enough to call the campus "award-winning?" Remember to always write from a neutral point of view.
   • In the second paragraph of the "Research" section opens with "Nottingham is also commendable in the humanities and social sciences." Who is commending the university? Does this statement belong under research?
   • In the "Enrollment and student life" section, the student enrollment is described as "more than 6,000." In the infobox, the enrollment is 33,550. Which is correct? What is your source?
   • No citations appear anywhere in the sub-section of "Controversies" describing the academic boycott. References are needed or this section must be removed in order to be a good article.
   • I noticed some earlier debate about the inclusion of "Campus 14." Ask, will the inclusion of this information seem approprate in 20 years?

3. Some sections need expanding. For example:

   • Academic Faculties states there are "22 schools of study," yet only two are listed.
   • The "Student accommodation" sub-section of "Enrollment and student life" is only one sentence. Surely this can be expanded into a paragraph with one or two appropriate sources.

4. Overall, the article is stable and well-illustrated.

If the concerns are not addressed within the next week, this article's good article nomination may not pass. Thank you for working to improve Wikipedia's coverage of education. Farside6 (talk) 23:11, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Re Campus14 - we aren't writing an article for 20 years time, we're writing it for now. I personally have no doubt that as long as there are 13 bars on the campus, people will try and drink in all of them in a single night. -mattbuck (Talk) 23:34, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Review after hold

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose quality:

• Lead needs expanding. Pull key aspects from the body of the article. See Wikipedia:UNIGUIDE#Article_structure for what should be included in a lead section about a university. Wikipedia:Avoid peacock terms suggests you remove the ranking information from the lead. This should be an easy fix.
• The lead section of "Enrollment and student life" needs to specify that over 6,000 is the international student population. Right now it reads "Nottingham has more than 6,000 undergraduate and postgraduate students..." which is true, it has 33,550!
• The second paragraph of "Research" is confusing. "Sir Peter Mansfield won his Nobel Prize, Professor Clive Granger, who was at Nottingham for 22 years as a student and academic, also won the Bank of Sweden Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel." It sounds like Professor Clive Granger is the name of the Nobel Prize.
• The paragraph in "Campus" about Campus 14 should probably go in the "student life" section.

1. B. MoS compliance:

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. References to sources:

   B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

   C. No original research:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   B. Focused:

   The list of schools is very long, and doesn't add anything to the article. Consider a Wikipedia:Hatnote to the schools with their own pages, or find another way to include a path to those articles without listing the names of 32 other schools.

4. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

   B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

Farside6 (talk) 01:17, 24 June 2008 (UTC)