Wikipedia:Peer review/University of Oklahoma/archive1

University of Oklahoma
This is the first article from WikiProject Oklahoma that is being peer reviewed for potential FA status. Please read the article and let me know if it meets FA standards in its comprehensiveness, layout, and content. I am an alum, so also please make sure I kept a NPOV.--Nmajdan 17:38, 6 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Please expand the lead to conform with guidelines at WP:LEAD. The article should have an appropriate number of paragraphs as is shown on WP:LEAD, and should adequately summarize the article.


 * Per WP:CONTEXT and WP:MOSDATE, months and days of the week generally should not be linked (Don't link September or Tuesday unless there is really good reason to). Years, decades, and centuries can be linked if they provide context for the article.


 * Per WP:MOS, the first letters of words in heading should not be capitalized unless: 1) it is a proper noun or 2) it is the first word of the heading.


 * Please alphabetize the categories and interlanguage links.
 * There is a section-stub for the history section; I'm not too sure why it is there, because the section certainly isn't a stub, though there might be a small bit of room for comprehensiveness there.


 * Per WP:MOSNUM, at Units of measurement, numbers with SI units of measure should have conversions in US customary units and vice versa. These conversions should keep to similar values of precision. For example, "the Moon is 380,000 kilometres (240,000 mi) from Earth". Note that the converted unit of measure uses a standard abbreviation, while the source unit is spelled out in the text.


 * Per WP:MOSNUM, there should be a no-break space -  between a number and the unit of measurement. For example, instead of 18mm, use 18 mm, which when you are editing the page, should look like: 18&amp;nbsp;mm.
 * You may wish to quickly browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for any further ideas.
 * Thanks, Andy t 23:24, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the advice. I made most of the changes that I saw. Those were all useful suggestions that I should've looked harder at.--Nmajdan 14:54, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
 * In response to Andy's point about dates: This task is easier with the aid of a 'dates' tab in edit mode. Simply copy the entire contents of User:Bobblewik/monobook.js to your own monobook. Then follow the instructions in your monobook to clear the cache (i.e. press Ctrl-Shift-R in Firefox, or Ctrl-F5 in IE) before it will work. You will also get a 'units' tab. Hope that helps. bobblewik 19:04, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Ok, I think I've made most of the changes. How does it look now? What else should I do before I apply for FA? Thanks. --Nmajdan 20:58, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Image crowding is a problem, the layout is a bit messy. and some sub-sections are too short. — Wackymacs 07:59, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Maybe get it through the good article process first? -- Ash Lux ( talk 14:09, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
 * I was under the impression that Good Articles are for shorter articles.--Nmajdan 18:24, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
 * According to WP:GA, GA is "generally, because while they nominally meet FA standards they are very short or they have potential to be a FA but are not ready for the process." So it probably doesn't hurt to submit it for GA status.  Besides, I'd hate to see it fail FA if we have one more option for input =) -- Ash Lux ( talk 21:21, 10 June 2006 (UTC)