Talk:College and university dating/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Reviewer: Buggie111 (talk · contribs) 12:48, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

Hello. I'll be reviewing this article. As I have a rather busy schedule, I'll get to it in the coming days, at the most by Saturday. Buggie111 (talk) 12:48, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
 * This is just a note that I've informed students that Good Articles reviews have been posted for some articles and they should reply to them ASAP. Thank you for taking up this review! --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; talk to me 16:51, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Sounds good :) Thanks for reviewing it! BonnieNoel (talk) 19:31, 16 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Please note I've posted further comments at the section. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; talk to me  05:27, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Criteria
 Good Article Status - Review Criteria   		A good article is&mdash;  :
 * (a) ; and
 * (b).

:
 * (a) ;
 * (b) ; and
 * (c).

:
 * (a) ; and
 * (b).

. . :
 * (a) ; and
 * (b).

</ol>

Review
<ol> <li>:</li>

<li>:</li>

<li>:</li>

<li>.</li>

<li>.</li>

<li>:</li>

</ol>

Discussion
Indeed, there is no need to attribute people by name unless it is a controversial claim. Few fixes, including my comments from the preeliminary review above, and this should be good to go! :) --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; talk to me 05:04, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Ha, yeah sorry. I got paranoid after the debacle when we first put up the page and got slammed for not citing things properly, so I wanted to be clear that it wasn't my opinion that I was writing. AndrewMozdy (talk) 19:58, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Just to clarify: attribution is not the same as citing with footnotes. By attribution we often mean saying directly in the text who is the author ("John Smith, professor at X, states that..."). --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; talk to me 17:01, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for reviewing this! I'll get to it as soon as I can. I saw in the additional notes section that you said a picture is not required, but if one is available, it should be used. How do we find a reliable enough picture to add to our article? BonnieNoel (talk) 09:20, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I.....wouldn't know. Also, that was the template's default writing. Don't worry about it. Maybe at FAC, if you take it that far, will images be a concern. Buggie111 (talk) 18:49, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
 * You can try the Finding images tutorial. The easiest solution, I think, would be to find a picture of a large number of students and just illustrate the article with that, without any mention on whether they are all dating and such. A picture of "target population" should be acceptable. --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; talk to me 19:22, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I added an image and I fixed the blue tags in the date rape section. BonnieNoel (talk) 03:59, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Also, I fixed "scandalous" and double-hyphen, and fixed the spelling errors BonnieNoel (talk) 04:10, 28 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Good job find a free image. I expanded the caption to justify relevance to this article. --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; talk to me 04:49, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Nice job. That leaves the quotes and the over-mentioning of other people's studies. Then you're done. Congrats with the image. Buggie111 (talk) 23:57, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
 * My partner should be doing that soon! Thanks for reviewing :) BonnieNoel (talk) 04:02, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't know if my partner wasn't receiving my emails, or what was happening, but you didn't deserve to wait so long. I'm sorry it was over a week.  I removed all but three quotes, and I left only two studies (each in a separate sections).  If you want anything else changed, just let me know! BonnieNoel (talk) 20:08, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
 * That's nothing, I've got plenty of time on my hands. One of my article took about 2 months to go through this process, a week is a drop in the bucket compared to that. I can only find one that stands out and looks sort of ugly, that one being the Rutgers quote in the Hooking Up section. After that, you're done. Buggie111 (talk) 00:00, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Done! Thank you :) BonnieNoel (talk) 01:06, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Passed. Good luck with your later classes, I hope you stay on Wikipedia. Until next time, Buggie111 (talk) 02:07, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you so much! :) Have a fantastic day!! :) BonnieNoel (talk) 05:39, 9 December 2011 (UTC)