Wikipedia:Peer review/Xavier College/archive1

Xavier College
This peer review discussion has been closed. I'd just like some suggestions to improve the page, with the aim of making it an A-Class article or even FA candidate.

Cheers, Nworsn (talk) 02:31, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Good article! Some minor suggestions:
 * In the infobox, add an exact number of students if the number is available. Done. N·worsn (parlez-moi) 12:57, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Add information to Buxton Campus
 * Could you give a little introduction to the Houses section? Are these residence halls? Are they like Hogwarts Houses? What do the colors mean? If the colors aren't significant, why are they there?
 * Curriculum needs information. Perhaps add a dual column list of different subjects taught, etc. "Xavier has a strong academic history" isn't supported and should be removed. What is an ATAR score?
 * Instead of "Associated Schools", put it under 'See Also', condense the information in that paragraph to fit next to the link in a short sentence
 * How about an expansion of this section? Worth a thought. N·worsn (parlez-moi) 12:57, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Hope that helps! Jhunt47 (talk) 22:35, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

Ruhrfisch comments: WHile this is a good start (and thanks for your work on it) I do not think it is anywhere near ready for FAC. 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; 18:25, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
 * A model article is useful for ideas and examples to follow - there are quite a few FAs on schools and colleges at Featured_articles
 * The lead does not follow WP:LEAD. For one thing the maximum limit is four paragraphs and this is five
 * The lead should be an accessible and inviting overview of the whole article. 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 but the Roskam quote is only in the lead.
 * My rule of thumb is to include every header in the lead in some way
 * File:South-Wing-Xavier-College.jpg is a copyvio and now marked for speedy dleetion on Commons (taken from the college's website)
 * Six dead external links need to be fixed - here
 * Per WP:CITE references come AFTER punctuation, and are usually at the end of a sentence or phrase. So fix things like ''Some buildings on the Senior Campus[16], and Studley House at the Burke Hall[17], are listed on the Victorian Heritage Register.
 * Article needs more references, for example this This was demolished in 1959 to make way for a major building project, including classrooms, tuckshop, and administrative buildings, and a chapel was built in 1967. Science rooms were added in 1969 and in the 1970s the Jesuits bought various adjoining properties to expand the campus. In 1996 a multi-purpose hall was completed with a new arts centre opened in 1998. In 2005, an Early Years Centre was opened and was based on the one at Burke Hall . has no refs and needs at least one
 * My rule of thumb is that every quote, every statistic, every extraordinary claim and every paragraph needs a ref. See WP:CITE and WP:V
 * The most difficult criterion for most articles to meet at FAC is 1a, a professional level of English. This is decent in most places, but has a lot of places that need polish.
 * For one thing there are a lot of short (one or two sentence) paragraphs that impede the narrative flow of the article and make it choppy. Combine these with others wherever possible, or perhaps expande them.
 * There are also places where the language is just odd - what does "old scholar" mean in ''Culturally, Xavier was described in June 2009 by old scholar John Roskam ...
 * Or "and old boy of the c" makes no sense in ''The centre was officially opened on 25 July 2008 with a blessing by the Archbishop of Melbourne, Denis Hart, and old boy of the c.
 * This is not a complete list - just pointing out general issues that would be problematic at FAC.
 * 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.)