Wikipedia:Peer review/McGill University/archive1

McGill University
This peer review discussion has been closed. I've listed this article for peer review because, although I haven't really contributed a lot to this article, I would like to follow some suggestions and improve the McGill University article, and perhaps go for FAC. Those that have actually not been lazy like me and pushed McGill to GA deserve to have their work as FA. Thanks, Sunsetsunrise (talk) 21:27, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Ruhrfisch comments: Congrats on GA, but a lot of work needs to be done to get this up to FA status. Here are some suggestions: Hope this helps, Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 04:43, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Model articles are useful for ideas to follow - I see there are 20 FAs in Category:FA-Class_Universities_articles so there should be some useful ideas there.
 * Make sure to have both metric and English units for all cases - km to miles in lead, for example. convert is useful here. Also be consistent in units used - for area is it square meters or hectares?
 * See WP:LEAD and make sure the lead summarizes the whole article - my rule of thumb is all headers and subheaders should be at least mentioned (word or phrase) in the lead. For example Student life section does not seem to be in the lead
 * Is corporate personality the proper term? Seems odd to me - perhaps corporate identity?
 * Lots of "citation needed" tags need to be taken care of before FAC. Also lots of uncited paragraphs and sentences - every paragraph, every quote, every statistic, and every extraodinary claim needs a ref. See WP:CITE
 * It might just be that I am tired, but I found the History section confusing - it just did not flow well.
 * History section ends with 1969 - nothing has happened in the past 39 years?
 * I would list the seven Nobel laureates by name
 * Be consistent and avoid needless repetition - we are told international students make 19% of the student body in the first paragraph of Profile, then "nearly 20%" in the fourth paragraph. Or almost all of the material in "Notable alumni and faculty" has already been mentioned earlier
 * Keep similar things together - second to last paragraph in Profile is all rankings on research, then two sections later there is a separate Rankings section.
 * Lots of short (one sentence) paragraphs interrupt flow. Also several quite short sections - can these be expanded or perhaps combined?
 * The words of the Alma mater are copyvio when presented in their entirety - quote a few lines or provide a ref linking to the full text.
 * Internet refs need url, title, publisher, author if known, and date accessed.