Talk:Human–Computer Interaction Institute/GA1

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

Reviewer: Viriditas (talk · contribs) 01:39, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

Note: I'm concerned that the nominator is no longer active as an editor. I will contact the user on his talk page. Viriditas (talk) 01:41, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

Checklist

 * GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * Prose OK
 * MOS OK
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * Article is based on primary sources. I'm sure there are quite a lot of secondary sources on the subject.
 * I looked for secondary sources, and noticed one or two mentions in tertiary sources; most secondary sources are about researchers and research, not the school itself
 * Unsourced statements are found throughout the article.
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * Per the above, it isn't clear why the primary editor chose to highlight specific research projects not reflected by the secondary sources.
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * Tone could be perceived as promotional. Will check sources.
 * I'm unable to find secondary sources. Since most of the content is sourced to the school itself, as a reader I feel like I'm being recruited rather than learning about a school in an encyclopedic manner.  This could of course be fixed with a number of major changes, but I'm proposing to merge whatever is salvageable into  Carnegie Mellon School of Computer Science and redirect this topic.  That's not my final word on the subject, so I'm going to wait for some feedback over at the parent discussion page.
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars, etc.:
 * Stable
 * 1) It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * Would an image of the Gates-Hillman Complex be appropriate?
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * I've proposed merging this article into the parent topic, Carnegie Mellon School of Computer Science. There are additional issues listed above needing to be addressed. Viriditas (talk) 08:15, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm still waiting for consensus to form over at Talk:Carnegie_Mellon_School_of_Computer_Science before I even contemplate a merge, but I think it is time to fail this article due to the primary use of self-published sources in a promotional manner. Please feel free to neutralize the content and find reliable secondary sources about the topic before it is submitted again. Viriditas (talk) 05:06, 26 June 2012 (UTC)