Talk:San Sebastian College – Recoletos/GA1

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

Reviewer: Moray An Par (talk) 05:41, 8 June 2011 (UTC)


 * 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):
 * Consider rewriting the lead. One-sentence paragraphs are not preferred.
 * The lead should be a summary of the article. Limit bolding to the first mention of the name and alternative names (including abbrevs). MOS:BOLD
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * All references are SSC published. They are also not properly formatted.
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * Academics section fail. Include enrolment, admission and graduation data. Discuss/tabulate foundation of major units. See WP:UNIGUIDE.
 * I don't think the "system" section belongs to the article. If the system is notable, consider creating a separate article and discuss here its relation to the system. It seems the system is a different unit from the college, and therefore must not be elaborated in the article. Same case for the Agustinian Recollects section.
 * Info on research, student life, athletics, campus and student governance are missing.
 * Do not list degree programs offered per WP:UNIGUIDE
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars, etc.:
 * 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):
 * There is no policy/guideline regarding this but I would prefer if there would be no gallery, and the images are to be integrated into the article.
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * This article has so many concerns that clearly cannot be addressed swiftly. I suggest the nominator to read WP:UNIGUIDE and featured university articles. This nomination is obviously premature, and therefore must be speedily failed. Moray An Par (talk) 05:54, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Pass/Fail:
 * This article has so many concerns that clearly cannot be addressed swiftly. I suggest the nominator to read WP:UNIGUIDE and featured university articles. This nomination is obviously premature, and therefore must be speedily failed. Moray An Par (talk) 05:54, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
 * This article has so many concerns that clearly cannot be addressed swiftly. I suggest the nominator to read WP:UNIGUIDE and featured university articles. This nomination is obviously premature, and therefore must be speedily failed. Moray An Par (talk) 05:54, 8 June 2011 (UTC)