Talk:Lethbridge Collegiate Institute/GA2

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

Criteria taken from Good_article_criteria

1. Well-written
(a) the prose is clear and the spelling and grammar are correct
 * ''Several grammatical errors throughout. Here are just a few examples:


 * On December 13, 2007, a note was found handwritten in a washroom stall. (should be "On December 13, 2007, a handwritten note was found in a washroom stall.")
 * The most advertised is the exchange Japan; LCI regularly exchanges students with Sapporo Commercial High School,[46] an institution which has also been informally twinned with LCI in a program implemented by Alberta Education.

(b) it complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation

Overall: 

2. Factually accurate and verifiable
(a) it provides references to all sources of information in the section(s) dedicated to the attribution of these sources according to the guide to layout
 * ''References 33, 34 and 44 are dead. This was mentioned in this assessment.

(b) it 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, and contentious material relating to living persons-science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines
 * Contains relevant references and quotations throughout, with additional notes on some content

(c) it contains no original research

Overall: 

3. Broad in its coverage
(a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic

(b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style)
 * Perhaps less detail is required in the Extra-curricular activities section. School song is completely irrelevant considering it is no longer in use.

Overall: 

4. Neutral
It represents viewpoints fairly and without bias.
 * '' No problems found. Meets this criteria.

Overall: 

5. Stable
It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
 *  No edit wars. Only recent problem was one good faith edit.

Overall: 

6. Illustrated, if possible, by images
(a) images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content
 * File:LCI2.JPG - Public domain, released by creator
 * File:Lethbridge_Central_School.jpg - Public domain, copyright expired
 * File:Goshen.png - Some rights reserved (share alike and attribution)
 * File:LCI_window.jpg - Public domain, released by creator
 * File:Teamflag1.jpg - Non-free image with fair use rationale


 * File:LCI22.JPG - Public domain, released by creator.

(b) images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions
 * File:LCI2.JPG - Relevant; no caption
 * File:Lethbridge_Central_School.jpg - Relevant (under heading Early years); suitable caption
 * File:Goshen.png - Somewhat relevant; unable to verify accuracy; caption does not explain image
 * File:LCI_window.jpg - Relevant; caption may need to be rewritten to include what the stained glass represents
 * File:Teamflag1.jpg - Irrelevant - caption is sketchy and I cannot see any information in the paragraphs immediately surrounding the image which refer to it. Caption says these logos are embroidered onto most athletics uniforms - perhaps could be moved to Athletics section. No justification for using a non-free image here.
 * ''File:LCI22.JPG - Little relevance in illustrating the Performing Arts Centre

Overall: 

7. Conclusion
This article does not meet the following points of the good article criteria:

Overall:  - Article fails assessment
 * 1(a)
 * 2(a)
 * 3(b)
 * 6(b)

Reviewer: tb240904 Talk Contribs 02:53, 15 June 2010 (UTC)