Wikipedia:Peer review/University of California, Berkeley/archive1

University of California, Berkeley

I want to put this article through peer review mostly to gather suggestions on how to find the right balance between depth and comprehensiveness, as well as article organization. The Student Life section, mainly the Student housing and Student groups subsections, seem especially problematic. The former seems to go into too much depth; it seems to be more comprehensive then the actual main student housing article, and longer than would seem necessary for the main university article. The latter brings up the question of which student groups to cover for a campus with "over 700" such groups, and how deeply to cover each one. Also, the "contributions to computer science" section seems a bit out-of-place; may be the main content should get its own article and then the highlights written into the History section? - Gku 09:38, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm pretty sure University of Michigan was recently featured. You might find it a helpful resource for your questions about formatting et al. Kaisershatner 17:59, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Michigan State University can be used as a guide as well. It's the only other university FA besides Michigan. Arcimpulse 03:26, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

After skimming through this article, there are some gripes that I have about it:

The references are in URL format. I would prefer using the MLA bibliography format or something similar (this allows people to know when the website accessed was produced, given that webpages change constantly).
I noticed a lot of external links within the main body of the article. Normally, these links should be in the external links section.
When it comes to FAs, lists are generally frowned upon. Try converting the lists to prose whenever possible.
The section about UC in pop culture should be in its own separate article. Such pop culture sections are constantly edited by people who want to leave their mark on articles, no matter how trivial (which leads to the article's becoming "unstable").
The Contributions to computer science can be summarized further and combined into a section focusing on overall research. I known that UC Berkeley is closely associated with Lawrence Livermore, and that there is a lot of research in the biomedical field. Try to expand on those.
Finally, try to keep boosterism under control. Instead, try to find some negatives concerning UC Berkeley (e.g. sharply rising costs due to state budget shortfalls)).

Feel free to ask if you have any more questions (I was the one who got the University of Michigan article to FA). Pentawing^Talk 04:18, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've tried to get rid of the boosterism and introduce some negatives (e.g., large introductory classes, professors more interested in research than teaching). I agree with the above criticisms (computer science, UC in pop culture) and I would add that the section on student housing is too long. But someone else will have to shorten these. [AT] April 24, 2006