Wikipedia:Peer review/Dhaka Residential Model College/archive1

Dhaka Residential Model College
This peer review discussion has been closed. I've listed this article for peer review because, this article has been well-written and I want the article to be featured. I have done a massive editing in the past few weeks. This is why, I am expecting editors' comments and suggestions concerning this article. Please help to review the article to be thoroughly well-written and excellent.

Thanks, Tanweer drmc (talk) 12:04, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Brianboulton comments: A brave effort, but there are serious problems with this article's prose. I have only checked out the lead, and have found problems with nearly every sentence:-


 * What is the purpose of adding the phrase "including school section" to the first sentence? Isn't the college actually a school for boys that has adopted the name "college"?
 * Why say that it serves grades 3-12, rather than giving the age range? The grades are not universal - for example they are not used in the UK and won't be understood there.
 * The term "self-governing" is rather vague. Does this mean that the school is completely independent of all external control? Is it self-financing?
 * Unless you briefly explain, many of your readers in English Wikipedia will be unaware that Bangladesh was part of Pakistan until 1971, so won't understand why the school was founded by the Pakistan government.
 * "schools cum colleges" is an awkward and imprecise phrase. It would be easier to refer to simply as a school, as you do later in the article?
 * "...in Dhaka as well as in the country." Since Dhaka is in the country, the phrasing is unnecessarily verbose. Just say "in the country".
 * Refs [3], [4] and [5]: it is not necessary to show within the quote the text being cited.
 * It is not encyclopedic to end a sentence with "etc."
 * "The campus of this institution is larger than any other schools and colleges in Dhaka city." Wrong grammar, should be: The campus of this institution is larger than that of any other school or college in Dhaka city." But having earlier made the point about the institution's size, I womder if the sentence is necessary at all.
 * "Today..." - when is "today"? Needs to be time-specific, e.g. "In 2009..."
 * "4000" needs to be written "4,000"
 * "another 80 non-teaching staff" - the word "another" is redundant
 * "The institution trains number of engineers, doctors,..." The words "number of" are redundant. In any event the institution does not train engineers, doctors etc. That kind of advanced training doesn't take place in schools. It may be true to say that many of the school's students have later trained as engineers, doctors and the rest.

Perhaps English is not your first language. If that is the case you really need to work with an editor with substantial expertise in English, to help you improve the prose throughout the article. There is also a problem with the article's tone. To be frank, it reads at the moment like promotional material on behalf of the school (this is often a problem with school articles). For example, the exhaustive list of curriculum subjects is of no interest to the general reader. The information on debate and quiz contest is overdetailed. Conversely, the history of the school's almost-50 years is very skimpy.

I am sorry to sound negative, but if you can attend to the points I have raised here, you will have improved the article. I note that it is currently a candidate for Good Article status. My view is that it is not close to GA; perhaps, however, the GA review will provide more pointers by which the article can be further improved. Brianboulton (talk) 23:56, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Tanweer Morshed's comments: Thanks a lot Mr. Brianboulton for the suggestions that you have made. You are right that English isn't my first language. Anyways, according to your suggestions I have rectified the Lead section of the article. I surely want to attend all the points you've described. And I will do that at any cost. But because of being busy with real life, I can't do that right at this moment. Whenever I am free, I will try my best to amend the article. More suggestions are welcome. Thanks again for your contribution. Tanweer (talk) 08:05, 26 October 2009 (UTC)