Wikipedia:Peer review/Utah State University/archive1

Utah State University
This peer review discussion has been closed. I've listed this article for peer review to look for areas for improvement. I'm looking for improvement on the entire page. If I had to pick a section that I thought needed the most improvement, I would think "Academics" but I'm not sure how.

Thanks, Jhunt47 (talk) 22:42, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

Ruhrfisch comments: Thanks for your work on this intersting article, here are some suggestions for improvement. Hope this helps. If my comments are useful, please consider peer reviewing an article, especially one at Peer review/backlog (which is how I found this article). I do not watch peer reviews, so if you have questions or comments, please contact me on my talk page. Yours, Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 04:56, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
 * A model article is useful for ideas and examples to follow. There are several FAs on universities at Featured_articles which seem as if they would be useful models.
 * The lead is not long enough - it should be an accessible and inviting overview of the whole article and needs to be exapnded.
 * Nothing important should be in the lead only - since it is a summary, it should all be repeated in the body of the article itself. However is accredited by the Northwest Commission on Colleges and Universities. is only in the lead.
 * My rule of thumb is to include every header in the lead in some way but many of the headers do not seem to be in the current lead - ice cream for one.
 * There are a bunch of dead or problematic links here (via the external links in the toolboix on this PR page)
 * Most of the references used seem to be from USU itself - the article should use independent third-party reliable sources as much as possible. See WP:V and WP:RS
 * Some places need more refs - the first two chapter of Athletics have none, for example. My rule of thumb is that every quote, every statistic, every extraordinary claim and every paragraph needs a ref.
 * Research and environmentalism also needs refs for several of the claims - would be useful to read WP:RECENT too.
 * Article has a lot of short (one or two sentence) paragraphs, which impede narrative flow. Combine these with others where possible, or perhaps expand them
 * Watch out for POV and peacock language - one example "impressive" in This meant closing all departments in Logan, including the already-impressive music department, which did not fall under that umbrella. See WP:NPOV and WP:PEACOCK
 * Starting with SYstem seems odd - I think History might work better
 * Please make sure that the existing text includes no copyright violations, plagiarism, or close paraphrasing. For more information on this please see Wikipedia_Signpost/2009-04-13/Dispatches. (This is a general warning given in all peer reviews, in view of previous problems that have risen over copyvios.)


 * Thanks for your feedback. I'll work on these in the coming weeks (during the Holiday Break from school most likely). Jhunt47 (talk) 22:40, 3 December 2011 (UTC)