Wikipedia:Featured article review/Hopkins School/archive1


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

The article was removed 17:12, 18 December 2007.

Review commentary

 * Notifications left at WP Connecticut and WP Schools. Loopla 06:20, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Notifications left at Staxringold and Harro5. Loopla 06:20, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Article was promoted in March 2006 and I just don't think it can still be classified as a Featured Article. Main issue seems to be citations (1(c) 'Factually accurate') There are sections with no references at all, and in total there are only 15 sources, many of which are the schools' website. Whilst what is there is quite well written, I think it could also still be expanded. I have seen GA school articles that I think are better than this one (therefore it is not one of the best articles on wikipedia). Loopla 07:06, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Loopla, please follow the instructions at WP:FAR to notify involved editors and relevant WikiProjects with Hopkins School and leave a summary of notifications here as in this sample. Thanks, Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 07:18, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Done. Thanks for pointing that out SandyGeorgia. Loopla 06:20, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Here are my thoughts: All in all: References are the major issue> This article needs alot of work to remain at FA status. I must admit, if i was assessing this article, it would fail GA. Twenty Years 15:17, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Twenty Years
 * There needs to be a ref for the claim in the lead for it being the fifth oldest school in USA, and the north america stuff. It may be in the article, but this is pretty controversials, it needs to be referenced in the lead.
 * Missing colour boxes in the infobox.
 * Is there a reference for the faculty and student numbers? or even to state when the information was current.
 * In the facilities section: The Walter Camp Athletic Center is named after alumnus Walter Camp, who is credited with inventing American football and later was Yale's football coach. needs some sort of reference.
 * This bit in Facilities: The Athletic Center has two floors of gyms, a pool, a trainer, and coaches office. The first floor is comprised largely of three standard-sized basketball courts. Dividers between these courts are removed and the united room is used for all-school assemblies. The second floor includes smaller weight rooms and training areas including the wrestling room. The Old Gym is a large one-room gym with a high roof. Before the Camp Athletic Center, this was the main athletic facility at Hopkins and is now used mostly for fencing team practices, an indoor ropes course, and storage. Currently, it is the temporary shelter for the library while the renovations are taking place. is terrible. This article is meant to be readable, this information is no different to any other darn school, and the last line about it being used as a temporary shelter is un-encyclopedic.
 * The paragraph in Academics: In terms of scheduling, school ends every Wednesday at 1:30 p.m. as opposed to the usual 3:30 p.m. This extra time is generally used to schedule away sports meets, to allow for travel time. Hopkins adopted a modified block scheduling system in 2005, giving each class fifty-five minutes rather than forty minutes. Each student has two weekly class schedules ("maroon week" and "grey week", named for the school's colors) which alternate throughout the school year. is terrible. We dont care what time school finishes, this is an encyclopedia. Just delete it all. Ill avoid that the section goes through every department individually.
 * Graduation requirements has no references
 * Student privileges section is simply unencyclopedic. This is simply cruft, some of it should be merged into academics (the student course options).
 * Second para in Extracurricular needs references.
 * The Notable People section with just the link is criminal. Needs to include prose, mentioning the diversity of students and teachers who went there, eg: good people and bad people. No mention of the alumni association.
 * 7 of the 15 references, are from the hopkins website. The book that is cited needs to have page numbers.

Yes, there is work to be done here, but the section "Student privileges" is tagged as unreferenced, and I can't find a single controversial fact there that warrants referencing. Can someone toss me a clue? What is an exmaple of something that should be cited in that section? It's a straightforward description of any normal functioning private school. Sandy Georgia (Talk) 01:16, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
 * The stuff on the senior project needs a reference and the second para (how its like govt etc) of student council are two that stick out. Twenty Years 14:11, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Just a sidenote - the image of the "Hilltopper" is simply out of place, and it needs to be removed. Twenty Years 14:13, 25 November 2007 (UTC)


 * It is my understanding that almost everything in a wikipedia article should be referenced if it is to be a Featured Article, otherwise it is original research (I might be wrong..it wouldn't be the first time)..without any sort of reference, "Student privileges" could have been made up and we wouldn't know any better. So for example there should be references for the fact that in the "2006–07 school year, that project is building houses for Habitat for Humanity" and "Each class functions like a state with a legislature of advisor group representatives with the class president as a Governor". Just my thoughts. Loopla (talk) 04:30, 28 November 2007 (UTC)


 * My understanding is that it needs to be referenced if it is controversial or likely to be challenged, and i am challenging certain sections, which shows that it needs a reference of some description. Twenty Years 06:57, 30 November 2007 (UTC)


 * FA Criteria concers:
 * Fails 1a - prose is not engaging and is not professional (in some sections)
 * Fails 1c - There are unsourced claims, which are detailed above. Twenty Years 07:03, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

FARC commentary

 * Suggested FA criteria concerns are referencing (1c) and prose (1a). Marskell 14:13, 4 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Remove This article is simply sub-standard. The referencing is in a shocking state. Per 1c and 1a. Twenty Years 16:52, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Remove Article is clearly not at Featured Article standard. Needs work to satisfy 1a and 1c. Loopla (talk) 00:43, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Remove per 1c. LuciferMorgan (talk) 11:09, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article review. No further edits should be made to this page.