Wikipedia:Peer review/City of London School/archive1

City of London School

 * A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for July 2009.
 * A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for July 2009.

This peer review discussion has been closed. I would like to help in significantly improving this article so it can gain at least good article status and possibly even featured article status. I have read the criteria for good article status but I would like opinions from other users of what this article needs in order for it to achieve at least good article status. I would like to thank in advance all the volunteer users who decide to provide their opinions.

Thanks, Tbo 157   (talk)   14:20, 7 July 2009 (UTC)


 * I'll take a look at this and get back with some comments over the weekend. Just at first glance, it seems like a decent article.--Wehwalt (talk) 02:25, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

Comments:
 * As I said, not a bad effort. But it needs considerable work in my opinion.

Overall:
 * Prose seems to run in very short paragraph, two to three sentences. These should be expanded as much as possible, to the extent you can.✅
 * Too much reliance on lists. If you must have them, advise putting them at the end, but please convert as much to text, and source all that you can there.  How do we know these were old boys?  Galleries are also generally not favoured.✅
 * Referencing needs work. Some are sourced to books, but don't have page numbers.  Additionally, many of the references are what we call "bare", that is, just a URL and sometimes a name.  Suggest you look up citation style or cite style and choose one of them, and format the references either way.✅

Lede:
 * Too short, for one thing. Check WP:LEAD, it should more or less summarize the article, with the information in the lede found also later in the article.  For that reason, it is usually not necessary to put footnotes in the lede.  However, your lede has information not found elsewhere, such as the fact that the Head is going to be, er, head of his conference this coming year. - I may add more later 

History sections:
 * Why so short? Judging by the refs, there are at least two books on this school.  Two refs should be enough to merrily go to town and write a reasonably detailed (without losing the reader's interest) history of the school, and possibly including some of the names that are listed, for example, as old boys.  Can't you get access to the books? ✅ I may add more id other users think I gave missed anything importantm
 * You desperately need references for what is asserted in the first paragraph of the "Move to Blackfriars" section. ✅
 * It is certainly possible to find out what 100k pounds is in modern terms. Try .  If you want to know how to cite that, I use that site in two FA's, Woodes Rogers and Matthew Boulton.  ✅
 * "apparently nodding". Says who?  I suggest that all five statue subjects are sufficiently well known that no particular explanation is needed. ✅
 * "a range of buildings at right angles along the whole of John Carpenter Street" That doesn't seem clear to me.  You might want to mention, if true, that these buildings were purpose built for the school (I imagine changing rooms, outdoor storage, that kind of thing to service the athletics and recreational activities).  Also, you mention three streets, and then call it an island site.  you might want to mention, in passing, what was on the fourth side. ✅- Cannot find references so removed
 * choral scholarships: When did this happen? ✅
 * Current premises: Can you say anything else about it?  Does it have computer labs, athletic fields, playgrounds, you get the idea, what facilities does it have?  Surely this is on the school web site as they try to sell prospective parents. ✅-I have added a facilities section and expanded the current premises section.
 * School life: Same thing, surely there is more on the school web site.  Also, the House namesakes, where they have their own articles and haven't yet been mentioned, do a pipe.  For Carpenter and Abbott, I imagine they are the same as have been mentioned, so say so.✅-I have linked the house names to the benefactors they are named after and added some additional details to the section.
 * Curriculum: I hate external links in text.  Unless there is something the reader really needs to see, do not use them.  Also, I'm not sure the subjects not offered is notable in the article, unless the reason why they are not offered relates, say, to the mission of the school. ✅
 * School uniforms: Nice description.  I guess a picture would be dicey in this day and age (what are you taking photos of those kids for?).  Incidentally, the John Carpenter Club, you might want to explain a bit more about it.  I gather from the other reference to it that it applies to students who represent England or Britain in sports competition.  Would it apply to non-sport competition?  What about if the kid is Scottish and is on the under-18 (or whatever) Scottish sport team? ✅ - Im not quite sure whether the rewrite has addressed the issue here so I will welcome opinions from other users. 
 * Do you know, you have never mentioned if this is a boarding school, day school, or both?✅
 * Anyway, some really good work in there, but it needs to be expanded and you got to work on those refs to have a chance at GA. I'll keep the article watchlisted and offer additional comments as necessary, here or on talk page.  Happy to discuss or answer questions about my comments.  As I said, good work, just needs expansion and finetuning!--Wehwalt (talk) 14:50, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much for the detailed section by section review. As this article has been written by a number of users over the past few years, I will post a note on the talk page so that collaboration can take place if any other users wish to help or provide their input.  Once again, thanks for the review.  Tbo 157   (talk)   16:16, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
 * For your information, I have posted a few notes at Talk:City of London School. Thanks.  Tbo 157   (talk)   17:37, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
 * They look good. Thanks for being responsive.  I should note that there seem to be two books on this school.  Why not contact the school?  When I do research, I mention I'm doing it for Wikipedia and I find people are very helpful and interested.  They might be willing to send you a photocopy.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:49, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the suggestion. Tbo 157   (talk)   11:07, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Im not quite sure what WP:Lead is after. Also, for the history section, im not quite sure if I've written some parts in too much detail.  And, can I ask how the history section could be expanded.  Thanks.  Tbo 157   (talk)   17:07, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
 * The history is looking better, though keep in mind that every paragraph must have at least one cite. I think, though, you really need to discuss WWII.  Did it remain open through the Blitz?  Or were the kids evacuated, either together or sepearately?  Was there bomb damage?  Let me look again at the lede and think about it.  What I try to do, when I'm writing is make the first paragraph the article in a nutshell, what it is and what it is best known for.  The remaining three paragraphs, I'll perhaps use two to summarize the history of whatever it is, and the third, for something like this which continues to today, as the present day status.  The lede is really to encapsulate the article and also to tempt the reader into looking further into it, I'd say.--Wehwalt (talk) 20:01, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the advice. I have put in a detailed section for WW2. Tbo 157   (talk)   13:36, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Good, I'll look it over next couple of days and get back to you.--Wehwalt (talk) 00:13, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Your help is very much appreciated.  Tbo 157   (talk)   14:40, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

(outdent). It is much improved; there are a bunch of niggly little things I'd recommend, and then I think you would be OK nomming it for GA. It will take me a little bit of time. Here are a few off the top of my head, and then I will go systematically through the article:

You should explain what an old citizen is when you first use the term, and decide whether it is capitalized or not, you have it both ways.

Lede: I would make a paragraph out of the last two sentences in the lede, but I would reverse their order.


 * Use non-breaking spaces for such constructions as "900 boys" "age 11" and "Year 6"


 * History: Yes, it is convenient that you can link directly to John Carpenter, Town Clerk of London, but I would still pipe that to John Carpenter, and have another link to Town Clerk of London, so that the reader can click and go to the articles on either the man or his office.


 * I'm confused by the account that Don left his will incorporating language from Carpenter's will, but Carpenter's will did not include a bequest to educate poor children. What was the language that was incorporated, a land description?


 * Incidentally, do any of the boys now attending receive scholarships that are deemed to be a continuation of the four boys who were to be maintained, or has that entirely been lost in the use of the funds to maintain the school?


 * "In around 1547, Carpenter's children were dispersed." I'm not sure exactly what you mean by this.  It's implied the maintenance of the boys continued.  Do you mean they were sent to different places?  Why?  Can you clear up this point/


 * "In 1823, a report published by the Charity Commission had revealed that over the centuries, the value of the bequest vastly exceeded the expenses of the boys' education due to the diminishing purchasing power of money." If money is purchasing less, then the boys' scholarship money should need to be topped up, they shouldn't be overfunded.  Suggest there's a misstatement somewhere in here.


 * "the proposal was started to be deemed" Awkward!


 * "act of parliament" Capitalize each time. Link if not already a link.


 * Richard Taylor's brother. If you don't have a name for him, and he doesn't play a meaningful part in this, leave him out, he's only confusing who "Taylor" is, later on.


 * You use "it was proposed" in consecutive sentences. Rephrase one of them.


 * "However, funding at this site was to be similar to that at the London Workhouse and no significant changes were made in how the funds would be used" I think what you are trying to say is that they couldn't renovate the site on three hundred pounds a year, bu this may not be clear to the reader.


 * You might want to mention, when first you use the place name, where Honey Lane Market was, to orient the reader.


 * "passing a law". Perhaps, "passing a bill"?  What was the Lords' objection?


 * "to maintain Carpenter's will on the Honey Lane Market site" Uncertain what it means.


 * Don't use the word keen in consecutive sentences, it is unusual enough in formal writing that it should be underused. Better yet, get rid of both.


 * I'd move the final paragraph to the "affiliations" section.

More later.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:59, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
 * ✅ - Thanks for pointing these out. I hadn't noticed that some of the things i wrote didn't make any sense.  Ive clarified all the confusions you've mentioned.  Tbo 157   (talk)   01:41, 21 July 2009 (UTC)


 * I went back through the section and did some copyediting myself, if I've made any goofs, I'm sorry and you can clear them up, but I felt that things were still a bit murky. I notice that you are using both citation and cite templates in the references, that's a no no, you have to use one or the other.  I advise citation.  I note that you are constantly using cite book to the 1995 book.  I would advise you to use what are known as Harvard citations.  You grabbed the measuringworth from my FA, Woodes Rogers, go back to that and see how it is done.  You put the book in the references in a certain format, and then you can just refer to that with the template that looks like .  By now you may be feeling you've bitten off more than you really want to chew with this review, but there isn't huge amounts more, and when it is done, you'll be in a position to credibly nom the article for GA.--Wehwalt (talk) 13:41, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

✅ Thank you for all your help so far. Tbo 157  (talk)   14:31, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Also have you read this book? Beginning about page 78 or so, there's an account of the background to the school's founding.  Might be some stuff worth including.--Wehwalt (talk) 14:07, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks. What is written here is almost identical, if not in less detail, to the 1995 book.  In fact, some of the words used on pages 80 and 81 are exactly the same.  The majority of the content in the 1995 book is from the school archives and so theres alot in there.  I had some difficulty in picking out the notable points.  Tbo 157   (talk)   14:31, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Back to the salt mines:

Milk Street: Remember, you now have mentioned it before this, the link should go there. Also, we know when the foundation stone was laid, but when did the school actually open? I think that needs to be there. And did it open when the Milk Lane building did, or did it have temporary quarters someplace else? And did anything else happen over the 40 years or so the school was at Milk Lane?


 * Try to lay out the things that made the school distinguished in text, not bullet points.


 * I gather from the image caption that the school moved to Blackfriars in 1883. That should be in the text.  What became of the old premises?  Also, schools don't decide whether to stay in London, people do.  Was it Headmaster Abbott?  Or did the two governance groups decide it should remain in the City of London because it fell under the City's jurisdiction?  Stimulating environment seems to be an inadequate explanation.


 * Do we have any idea why Sir Thomas More was chosen? Your description of him as a religious martyr seems at slight contradiction with the nondenominational aspect of the school.

World War II:
 * Probably not necessary to say "then headmaster". It's understood that he is no longer the head.  Same goes for Marlborough's incumbent.
 * "And so on 1 September" Too informal, no need to begin sentence with an and.
 * The story of the nonstop train to the West Country is a good one, but it needs a little cleanup. Why did they have to throw a letter onto the platform of Ealing Broadway if they started from Ealing Broadway.  Were they just shunted on and locked in before discovering their plight?  I would not use the passive voice here, but simply say, who decided to make the stop to let the school off?  Please consider elsewhere in the article substituting the active for the passive voice, just to give more info to the reader.
 * You never say where the kids wound up sleeping at Marlborough, that is, after the first night.
 * "Difficulties were also faced with life in general." Awkward and uninformative.
 * "This is something which some Marlburians (pupils of Marlborough College) later regretted." While it is nice to know what Marlborough students are called, the parenthetical breaks the flow of the sentence and I'd simply say "Marlborough students" or pupils, or whatever sounds best to a UK reader.
 * The article tremendously overuses the passive voice. The passive voice tells us what happened, but skimps on who did it or why.  Please go through the article and try to change as much as possible to the active voice, and insert the, er, actors (in other words, instead of "it was decided", have "Jim decided")
 * "boy was killed as a direct result of enemy fire" Why are you telling us this twice?
 * "A request to take the exams at Marlborough College was refused" Again, the flaw of the passive voice.  Who refused it?  Marlborough?  The examiners?  Inquiring minds want to know.
 * "On their way there, boys had experienced bombs landing on Cannon Street and Old Jewry." If this was phrased in the active voice, it could be riveting.  As it is, it's rather ho hum.  When did this happen by the way?  It's not specified.  Note that most City of London streets and the Law Courts almost certainly have articles written and there should be links.
 * "The sentence about the school's success needs to have some source inline, because it's opinion. Someting like "According to soandso, who chronicled the school's history in a book, ..."  I'd also make that the last sentence of the section, after the maerial about the war memorial.  I would also not start with "To this day", but simplay state "An annual service on Rememberence Day (or Sunday, or whenever it is) is held ..."
 * Please note that I'm not criticizing the writers of this article about the passive voice. Everyone has their writing habits.  I certainly do, and sometimes they have to be pointed out to me.  A set of outside eyes always helps an article.

Modernisation:
 * "The curriculum had changed significantly at the turn of the century" How? Passive voice! Did one of the headmasters advocate for the change?  If so, who?
 * "which was designed as a memorial" Perhaps designated?
 * Transition to Queen Victoria Street. A little more detail would be nice.  Was another Act of Parliament needed?  Did the sale of the old premises pay for the new property, or did the City already own it?

Affiliations:
 * I'd remind you that you've already mentioned the other two schools, and the Barbican, but you can leave the links in if you like because it has been a while since you have.

✅. Im not sure about what the situation was with the religious martyr statue and the 1995 book or any google searches don't mention much about the technical details of the new building such as whether the Coporation already owned the land. Im not sure what happened to the Milk Street building but its almost certainly not there anymore. I don't have any references to back this up. Rgarding the photos, I've searched on flickr and google for creative commons licensed photos, and I could only find the organ.

I'll finish up with the school life sections later on. Is there any chance of getting some images of the school? Sometimes you can use images on Flickr, and I'd be glad to look at any potential image to tell you whether it is usable or not (it's copyright concerns I'm thinking of).--Wehwalt (talk) 22:43, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Moving back to modernisation section:


 * Don't begin sentence with "and so in" Too informal!  Strike "and so".


 * Suggest moving "Affiliations" to subheading of "School life" and renaming it "Governance".

School life:


 * "As such the school's ..." Suggest striking first two words and adding "this belief" to the end of the sentence.


 * Houses: It reads a little listy, suggest "In addition to houses named for founder Carpenter and former Headmaster Abbott, houses are named for ..."  You might want to put first names for Carpenter and Abbott, it could go either way.


 * Curriculum. A little explanation might be needed for "First Division".  I take it the second of four levels?


 * Traditional events "for all boys to attend." Probably redundant.


 * Fees:"is offering sports scholarships" likely "began offering sports scholarships" would be better.  And the next sentence needs to be broken up.


 * Current pupils. I'm wondering a bit about privacy concerns here.  Has this been covered in some reputable publication?  Also, on Tom Brown's Schooldays, you are linking to the book, you need a pipe to the recent film.


 * Old citizens: It's capitalized down here, yet in the WWII section, it is lower case.  Can you ensure consistency?

After you make these changes (if you like), I'll give it a final read through, and leave you with my final general impressions, I won't try for a third detailed review. Since you seem quick to deal with these things, that will probably be tomorrow.--Wehwalt (talk) 01:28, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

✅ Regarding current pupils, the actor is mentioned as one of the main chacracters in the article for the 2005 film. He is also fine with it being there. So it shouldn't be a problem unless im not picking up on a wikipedia policy or any legal issues in the USA, where the wikimedia servers are. Tbo 157  (talk)   10:11, 22 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Do the articles mention that he attends the school? I'm sure it's fine, after all, everyone knew where the princes were going to school, for example.  It's just that the UK has gone so manic about child protection that they won't let authors speak in schools without a background check.  I'll look over the article later today.  After that, feel free to leave the peer review open for more comments, though with the lack of peer reviewers these days you aren't too likely to get any, or you can close it and try for GA.--Wehwalt (talk) 10:58, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Harry Michell is covered in quite alot of websites and hes nearly 18 anyway.  I think I'll put the article in for review after you've had a look over it.  Theres a huge bcaklog there at the moment so it might take over a month for it to get GA reviewed.  Tbo 157   (talk)   11:54, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, I know, I have an article, California's 12th congressional district election, 1946 which has been sitting there for over two weeks, but I want a GA before I nom it for FA because I'm shooting for WP:FOUR on that, so I have no choice but to wait out the process. That's fine on Mitchell, if it is public knowledge, don't see a problem.--Wehwalt (talk) 11:58, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Could you list your article for assessment on a related wikiproject's assessment page? After all a GA review can be done by anyone who has not significantly contributed to the article.  Tbo 157   (talk)   17:35, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
 * That's a thought, thanks. Although the California WikiProject has been totally unhelpful to me, even though I have added to their FA and GA stats.  Maybe politics.--Wehwalt (talk) 17:49, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
 * No problem. Tbo 157   (talk)   18:49, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

OK, I just did a pretty heavy cleanup of the article. There were limits, though, since I don't have the sources and you might want to doublecheck to see if I made any factual mistakes. I see you only implemented some of the suggestions, that's OK, but you might want to read over this review and consider implementing some more.

The greatest problem I see is the great use of the passive voice in this article. It's going to get noticed in GAN, you should certainly clear up as much as you can. Some use of the passive voice is OK, but not as much as you have here.

Part of what you are doing with a decent Wikipedia article is telling a story. Some will contradict me, but I think you really are. You want to keep your readers interested. Smooth flow of information is essential. Make sure the story flows, and there is no point at which the reader is going to do a double take and say "What? What happened just there?" The place where I see the biggest problem with this is the account of Carpenter's will, and the account of the school's founding. Go back, read it over to yourself, make sure it goes forward smoothly and is coherent. Keep to a strictly formal style, avoiding informalisms like "and so".

You could also do with a few more images. Preferably of school life. Another nice one might be taking one from across the Thames, showing both the school building and part of the Millenium Bridge.

That's about it. I think it will make GA, but I'm sure the reviewer will make you do some changes. You have a solid basis for GA here now. Good luck! Happy to answer questions or give advice.--Wehwalt (talk) 20:07, 22 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks for all the advice. Unfortunately regarding Carpenter, i just wrote out pretty much what the book says in my own words.  So I guess the only way to write a more detailed history would be to get material from the archive room and piece things together.  I'll see what advice is given to me in a GA review.  Good luck with your articles.   Tbo 157   (talk)   20:18, 22 July 2009 (UTC)