Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/The Avery Coonley School/archive2


 * The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by SandyGeorgia 00:15, 14 March 2010.

The Avery Coonley School

 * Nominator(s): Nasty Housecat (talk) 02:14, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

A school started in her home by an impassioned eccentric which became a national showcase for avant garde educational philosophy in the early 1900s, later made itself a guinea pig for educational experiments, and finally wrapped itself around the much maligned idea of gifted education. With connections to Frank Lloyd Wright and a renowned landscape architect (yes, there are such things), it is entwined in the story of “progressive” thought in America and yet somehow situated in the otherwise dull suburbs of Chicago. There are few FA school articles, none of them “alternative” schools. With a place in both the National Register of Historic Places and in controversy about modern education, it is an unusual and interesting story and the nominator’s first FA nomination. Following its first unsuccessful trip to FAC, it has had the benefit of good copyediting and review (thank you Moni3 and Ruhrfisch), with special attention to the writing and comprehensiveness of its scope. Nasty Housecat (talk) 02:14, 3 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments. No dab links, external links and alt text fine. Good luck on getting it through this time! Ucucha 02:19, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks! --Nasty Housecat (talk) 06:32, 3 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Comment Personally I would remove the External Links section and instead link to the website in the infobox. Benny the mascot (talk) 01:31, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for commenting here, Benny. All of the current featured school articles put the school website link in both places. I agree it looks a bit redundant, but that seems to be the   standard. --Nasty Housecat (talk) 01:55, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Ok, but would it be acceptable to activate the link in the infobox? Benny the mascot (talk) 02:36, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Missed that. Fixed now. --Nasty Housecat (talk) 03:08, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
 * In the History section: "The Cottage School was free to all students, and was supported by Coonley's own resources and funds raised by the Kindergarten Education Association—of which Coonley was president—and which promoted new educational ideas, raising money to help support them." This sentence seems to be too long, and there is ambiguity as to what the modifiers are actually modifying. What/who promoted new educational ideas? Was it the school, Coonley, funds, KEA, or something totally different? Also, whom did the money support? The students, I assume? Perhaps it would be useful to split this sentence into two and clarify both of these ambiguities. Benny the mascot (talk) 02:53, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Agreed and addressed. Should be clearer now. --Nasty Housecat (talk) 03:08, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
 * I feel that your discussion of the Moravian tiles could use more detail. "The tiles on the fireplaces and entry floors boast patterns in literary and educational themes, such as The Canterbury Tales in the old library." - This sentence makes me wonder how the tile manages to depict such a fundamental literary work. Could you possibly provide more detail and some pictures? Benny the mascot (talk) 23:35, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
 * I think a that level of discussion of the tiles would be difficult to do in context and amount to unneccesary detail. It would be very nice to include a photo of them, but there is not enough space on the page for an additional image and the cloister and learning space images are far important. Fortunately, there is a very good image of similar tiles at Moravian Pottery and Tile Works, which is wikilinked in the article. --Nasty Housecat (talk) 23:59, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
 * I see your point, but you mention the tile for Canterbury Tales without providing details about the actual artwork. I'm not suggesting a comprehensive overview of the tiles per se, but rather only a discussion of that specific Canterbury Tales tile with the same amount of detail you use in describing the tile with the ship. I suppose we can get the opinions of other reviewers as well of you disagree. Benny the mascot (talk) 02:49, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
 * I confess I am at a loss what more to say there, given that the Canterbury tales example is itself merely meant to provide some detail regarding what is really a minor detail of the architecture, namely, "the literary and educational themes". In my view, the description of the larger, tripartite mural in the courtyard is the best illustration of how the tiles are used. That mural is actually visible above the arches in the photo in the infobox. I would like to obtain a larger image, in which the detail is even more apparent, if I can. Maybe when the weather is better. In the meantime, I remain open to any specific suggestions. --Nasty Housecat (talk) 05:28, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
 * That's fine, I'll let other reviewers look into it. Benny the mascot (talk) 15:38, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Just out of curiosity, why haven't you included a list of notable alumni? Surely some famous person should have graduated from such a well-known school! Benny the mascot (talk) 21:38, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Great question. I think so too. The bottom line is that the school does not keep track of kids that long. They follow them up to college and then stop. Not to mention that people tend not to publicize their elementary school once they grow up. It is the one piece of information I really feel is missing but there seems to be no way to find out.--Nasty Housecat (talk) 22:00, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
 * I have finished reading the entire article, and I am impressed by its overall attention to detail and comprehensiveness. It is well- written and engages the reader throughout its extensive review of Avery Coonley's history and academic performance. Nasty Housecat's work is certainly commendable, and I feel honored to have worked with such a talented editor.


 * Having said that, I of course feel that this article is excellent. However, this FAC FAQ page says "New reviewers are encouraged to leave only Comments until they are sure that they understand the criteria." Therefore, since this is my first FAC review, I respectfully decline to vote. Benny the mascot (talk) 16:51, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Benny, and thanks for your corrections in the text, too. --Nasty Housecat (talk) 20:35, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
 * I noticed that you claim above that the school is situated "in the otherwise dull suburbs of Chicago". Really? I mean, REALLY??? Nice way to make the Chicago suburbanites feel good about themselves! :P Benny the mascot (talk) 22:46, 6 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Support. I left a list of things to address on the talk page of the article following the previous FAC. I concentrated on comprehensiveness and writing. NastyHousecat (with an intriguing username) has exceeded my suggestions and expectations. I find the article to be an interesting look at educational trends in the 20th century with a specific look at gifted education, which is too often misunderstood and an unfairly maligned focus. --Moni3 (talk) 23:26, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the support. --Nasty Housecat (talk) 01:37, 5 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Support. Well written and referenced. Draws the reader in. All criteria have been met and I really can't find anything to be concerned about, which is rather unusual. -- Sh i r ik ( Questions or Comments? ) 18:37, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the support.--Nasty Housecat (talk) 19:10, 5 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Support I was involved in a very thorough (peer) review on the article's talk page and all of my concerns were addressed then, even finding ap icture of the Thanksgiving procession. Well done, Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 15:35, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you  for the support --Nasty Housecat (talk) 16:30, 6 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Support by Finetooth. I peer reviewed this article in January, and it has been so improved since then that I hardly recognize it. Wow! Here are six nitpicks:
 * Near the end of the "Founding and Cottage School" section, a sentence says: "The school organized by the pupils into a civic league has made itself responsible for the conditions of the streets in certain portions of town, and is not only cleaning up by trying to get the rest of the town interested in the problem." Shouldn't "cleaning up by" be "cleaning up but"?
 * In the "1929 building" section, the common names of bird species, Great Horned Owl and Indigo Bunting, take capital letters, though "hawks" is generic and OK as is.
 * In the third paragraph of the "1929 building" section, a word seems to be missing from "The design ties the building to the land in style of the Prairie School...". Insert "the" between "in" and "style"?
 * Also in the "1929 building section": "Each child had their own semi-private space with a fold-down seat, reading light, and bookshelf." - Would "Each child had his or her" be the best way to avoid s-v disagreement?
 * In "Traditions", tighten "Many of these themes and events have grown into lasting school traditions over the years, with which the school community has come to identify each group and certain times of year" by deleting "over the years"?
 * In "Student body and finances", a word seems to be missing from "Early childhood and through kindergarten are screened in one hour play sessions." Maybe "Students in EC through kindergarten are screened... ". Finetooth (talk) 03:09, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you Finetooth. I have made the corrections you suggested. --Nasty Housecat (talk) 20:02, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Comment Tell us what country it is in. This might seem obvious, but not everyone can name the states of the US. Amandajm (talk) 09:27, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Many Americans can't name them either. ;-) I've made the revision. Thanks. --Nasty Housecat (talk) 20:02, 7 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * It's odd to (for example) refer to a book written by Dewey and Dewey as "Dewey" and a book written by Brown, Finn and Brown as "Brown". But Wikipedia's formatting standards in this area are looser than a two dollah hoe, so I can merely roll out a hopefully-unoffensive passing remark on the interesting incongruity.&bull; Ling.Nut 14:31, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
 * "Two dollah hoe." That's funny. It is more congruous to list all three authors. I've made the revision. Thanks. --Nasty Housecat (talk) 20:02, 7 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments - sources look okay, links checked out with the link checker tool. Ealdgyth - Talk 15:11, 13 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Comment Please clarify this abbreviation in the infobox: "PK" (in "PK–8"). Dabomb87 (talk) 23:34, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
 * I've expanded "PK" to "Preschool" and added the age range (4-12) for the benefit non-US readers. Thanks. --Nasty Housecat (talk) 23:46, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.