Talk:University of Glasgow/GA1

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

This article has been reviewed as part of WikiProject Good articles/Project quality task force in an effort to ensure all listed Good articles continue to meet the Good article criteria. In reviewing the article, I have found there are some issues that may need to be addressed, listed below. I will check back in seven days. If these issues are addressed, the article will remain listed as a Good article. Otherwise, it may be delisted (such a decision may be challenged through WP:GAR). If improved after it has been delisted, it may be nominated at WP:GAN. Feel free to drop a message on my talk page if you have any questions, and many thanks for all the hard work that has gone into this article thus far.


 * What's in this article looks reasonable, but unfortunately it's almost all uncited, thus failing GA criterion 2.


 * There are at least 11 dead links.


 * There has been an unaddressed request for citation since October 2008.


 * All dated claims need to be put into context. For instance the lead says "Glasgow is currently the only university in Scotland with a full range of professional departments ...". As of when? 2009?


 * The two sections on sports clubs are too short to standalone and should be merged.


 * "Glasgow has led the UK's university debating culture since 1953." Really? Extraordinary claims like that one need to be backed up by reliable sources.

--Malleus Fatuorum 19:38, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Madcoverboy (talk)
The article has a variety of style and neutrality issues that need to be addressed: "The University of Glasgow is a public research university principally located in Glasgow, Scotland.
 * Lead sentence should state where the institution is located and distinguishing categories.
 * Preponderance of unattributed rankings and general peacockery and boosterism in the lead are inconsistent and give entirely undue weight: is it top seventeen, top ten, top 20, ...? Strike all of this out and actually describe the university's history, campus, programs, athletics, alumni, etc. not what wags at a magazine think of it.
 * Reputation is self-evidently POV and needs to be summarized and non-rankings related material spun out into appropriate sections (financial endowment to Administration and organization, student body to a Student body section, etc.)
 * Remove table of historic rankings as this is unencyclopedic information
 * Embedded list under faculties needs to be prose-ified or removed
 * Article lacks any description of academic programs & degrees, enrollment statistics, honors, etc.
 * Description of students needs to be expanded to include notable clubs and groups, intercollegiate or club athletics, etc.
 * No discussion of research activities, intellectual traditions, institutional economic impact, etc.

Closing review

 * As these issues remain outstanding, and there appears to be no work in progress to address them, this article has now been delisted. --Malleus Fatuorum 21:26, 24 August 2009 (UTC)