Talk:Willamette University College of Law/Archive 1

Comments
Perhaps this should be merged with Willamette University. Katr67 18:12, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Nevermind, it's much better now. Katr67 03:07, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

GA Review
I think this article is pretty close to meeting the GA criteria. It needs a little bit of work to bring it up to par, so I am placing it on hold until the issues are resolved.


 * The history section is overall very good and well-referenced. It could use a little work to tie difference aspects of the history together a bit better - there are a couple of areas where it jumps from one topic abruptly to another.


 * Consider promoting changing the order of the academics and facilities sections. I would consider a description of the academic programs to be more important than a description of a couple of buildings. The academics section mentions the combined JD/MBA program, as well as several others, but makes no mention of its regular JD program. Is anyone enrolled in this school just for a JD, or has the school just decided that a solo JD is worthless and is combining it with an MBA to give graduates more options?


 * The description of the library could be expanded a bit, too. It seems to contain some minimally-notable and trivial items. For example, "The library contains study rooms, video rooms, conference rooms, computer labs, and is staffed by reference librarians." Really? OMG! I never expected a library to contain such resources and actually be staffed by librarians!!!! I think this information is kind of obvious,...


 * The list of distinguished faculty should probably included a brief description of the individual's notability, like what was done for the students. Also, please change the font size for these descriptions to normal size, not the small size. Using a small size is not necessary, and looks like bad form. Consider changing the name of 'distinguished current and past faculty' to simply 'distinguished faculty' -- it's best for section headers to contain the simplest wording possible, and with such few individuals on the list, it's not really important to distinguish between current and former members, either.


 * The article is overall sufficiently referenced for GA status, but the inline citations should be formatted in accordance with WP:CITE. Specifically, references should contain full author, title, publisher, and date of publication, and if the reference contains a web link, it should have a 'Retrieved by: ' date attached to it. This is important so that, should the link ever become inaccessible (e.g. 404 not found), the reference is still useful and we have some way of tracking and verifying it, even if we can't physically access it on the web.

Other than that, the article looks good! Let me know when these issues are addressed! Dr. Cash 21:39, 19 August 2007 (UTC)


 * I believe I have addressed most of the issues.


 * On the history item, it is not really grouped by topic, it is in chronological order. Since it is a history section I think that is the best way to approach the topic.
 * The citations have been upgraded, if there is no author listed it is because the source did not list one.
 * I have added a little bit to the library, but there really is not that much to add. As to the obviousness of the library having those items, I refer to this note. It may be obvious to you and me, but then again a law school having a library seems pretty obvious to me, but we include it for context.
 * The section re-araingment has been done
 * The faculty/alumni items have been addressed
 * Please let me know if there is anything else. Aboutmovies 20:04, 20 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Looks good. The only thing is that the programs section still mentions the joint JD/MBA program first, as opposed to the standard JD program. Are must students at this school in the joint program (I doubt it)? The programs with larger enrollments should be mentioned first in this section. Dr. Cash 21:04, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
 * OK, moved that around a bit, let me know if that works. Aboutmovies 01:00, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Looks good now! Cheers! Dr. Cash 03:01, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Establishment date?
By all sources I could find (even in the caption box of this article), Willamette law school was established in 1883, and thus is the second oldest law school in the western US, UC Hastings (1878) being the first (if Waco Texas is not western US). Therefore, I have edited the content. Zoticogrillo (talk) 21:38, 15 January 2008 (UTC)


 * OIC, the other date in the 1840's is the date of the main campus. Opps.  I nonetheless enriched the content. Zoticogrillo (talk) 21:41, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I just reverted the edit. Law school=oldest in Pacific NW (i.e. not California), the university is the oldest in the West (hard to define but definitely past the Rockies). Aboutmovies (talk) 21:43, 15 January 2008 (UTC)