Wikipedia:Peer review/RAJUK Uttara Model College/archive1

RAJUK Uttara Model College

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because the article has gone through a major make-over but it needs more . i want wikipedia contributors to have a look at this article and provide suggestions regarding prose and other problems that the article has and also about what can be done to improve the article. Thanks, Souvik.arko (talk) 05:58, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Comments by mcorazao

Overall a good start. Don't have time for a thorough review at the moment but here are some initial comments:

Here are my comments:

• Notability
  • The article needs to do a little better job of establishing its notability. For some topics the notability is pretty obvious but for a topic like a high school an article should demonstrate why this high school is one of a small percentage of high schools in the world that is significant enough to merit an article.
  • Ideally this notability should be established in the first paragraph.
  • Since a typical reader might be dubious about the notability it is good to explicitly mention an authoritative source that has concretely stated the importance of topic (i.e. not just a reference). Even better a quote from the source put in lead is good to establish notability.
  • Apart from quoting a paritcular authoritative source I would recommend trying to give references to more than one source when establishing notability so that nobody questions whether this article should exist (this is debatable; Wikiproject Schools seems to be rather liberal about notability).
• Additional content that would be desirable:
  • Student demographics - Is there information available about what the student make-up is like: kinds of or distributions of family backgrounds, etc.
  • Extracurriculars - The extracurricular activies discussions should be expanded a lot. E.g. talk about the history of the school magazine, how many students work on it, etc. Is there anything special or surprising about what it covers (does it just cover mundane details of student life? Does it do profiles of notable students? Does it cover events in the community? etc.). Tell us more about sports. Does the school compete in a league with other schools? What kinds of tournaments are there? etc.
• Copyediting comments:
  • The article needs some general polishing on the writing (I don't know if this is a more an issue of non-native English speakers doing the writing or regional dialects of English creeping into the writing).
  • The Bengali name should also be transliterated in the Roman alphabet and in IPA.
  • <ref>s should be placed after the period at the end of a sentence.
  • Terms like "viva voce", "secondary school certificate", and "quirat" should be explained, at least briefly. Such terms are not necessarily common knowledge to everyone in the world.
  • Avoid using symbols like ampersands (&) in the text. Explicitly write out "and."
  • Lists are introduced with overly terse headers, e.g. "RUMC aims -". It is generally best to introduce lists with complete sentences, or at least a reasonbly detailed phrase. If a phrase is used terminate it with a colon (:), not a dash(-).
  • There are spaces missing before parentheses in a lot of places.
  • There should not be any spaces between <ref> tags and the text preceding them.
  • Be careful about words like "wonderful." Generally unless the article is explicitly describing opinions of some particular source such words make the article sound biased.
  • "football,basketball, cricket, handball etc competitions are ...": Should be rewritten as something like "football,basketball, cricket, handball, and other competitions are ..."
• Other comments:
  • There are some very short sections. Ideally a section should have at least 2 paragraphs and — say — 8 sentences. If you can't come up with even 4 sentences on a subject then the text should be merged into some other section.
  • There are several big tables. It might be good to make the tables collapsed by default and make them floating (see Help:Table and look for "Collapsible tables" and "Floating table"). This makes them less intrusive and doesn't force the reader to look at them if they are not interested in those details.
  • Some of the detail in certain areas may be excessive (this is subjective, though):
    • Aims and beliefs. As it is this section seems unnecessary. Most of the statements in these lists are similar to credos of a lot of schools and organizations. If there is something particularly unique about RUMC's beliefs or how it applies them compared to most schools then this should be discussed. In such a context listing these out might be appropriate (perhaps as a collapsible table to the side).
    • Listing out each of the positions in the Board of Governors.
    • Uniforms. I would say 1) don't discuss this as a list, 2) cut back slightly on the detail, 3) discuss a little more about the motivation and the culture surrounding the use of uniforms.
    • Rooms in the campus. Describing where every room is located is trivia that almost nobody but people associated with the school would care about.
  • Be careful about lists. Wikipedia tends to disdain lists in articles in favor of simply talking about what you need to in the prose. For example, in the School events and programs section it would be preferable to simply discuss the different activities in a series of paragraphs rather than have a list (it's not even clear what some of these in the list are).

You might want to use an article like Amador Valley High School as a model.

Hope this helps.

Mcorazao (talk) 21:54, 13 December 2009 (UTC)