Content deleted Content added
→[[Caulfield Grammar School]]: re-worded nomination |
→[[Caulfield Grammar School]]: Object |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
===[[Caulfield Grammar School]]=== |
===[[Caulfield Grammar School]]=== |
||
Self-nom. This article has been [[Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Caulfield Grammar School/archive1|through FAC before]] and was not promoted, but has been improved and many opposing votes came before the improvements. It has also [[Wikipedia:Peer review/Caulfield Grammar School|recently finished peer review]], and is one of the best high school articles on Wikipedia. Compare with [[Stuyvesant High School]], also a [[Wp:fac#Stuyvesant_High_School|current FAC]], and then have a vote. Thanks. [[User:Harro5|Harro5]] 22:56, Jun 25, 2005 (UTC) |
Self-nom. This article has been [[Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Caulfield Grammar School/archive1|through FAC before]] and was not promoted, but has been improved and many opposing votes came before the improvements. It has also [[Wikipedia:Peer review/Caulfield Grammar School|recently finished peer review]], and is one of the best high school articles on Wikipedia. Compare with [[Stuyvesant High School]], also a [[Wp:fac#Stuyvesant_High_School|current FAC]], and then have a vote. Thanks. [[User:Harro5|Harro5]] 22:56, Jun 25, 2005 (UTC) |
||
*'''Object'''. This article has many good qualities and sections, but too much promotional POV. I'm sorry I missed commenting on Peer Review, as you don't seem to have gotten any pointers there about that aspect. Please note that I had a similar criticism to make of [[Stuyvesant High School]] a little lower down, not because I'm obsessed with the subject (I hope), but because a promotional tone and florid style are unfortunately typical of our school articles. Perhaps they're irresistibly influenced by the fulsomeness of school brochures, I don't know. Both the current school FACs are indeed very much better than the run-of-the-mill school articles and have far '''less''' promotional POV; but they're not supposed to have '''any'''. [[Caulfield Grammar School]] shouldn't be written "from inside" at all, compare Geogre's reasoning about [[Stuyvesant High School]]. I mean, "The boarding community is a strong and proud one"? Brrr. The Yarra Junction Campus ''is now at the forefront of environmental education'', as students live in fully sustainable eco-cabins with rainwater tanks and solar power technology"—keep the info, lose the advertising! "the establishment of a campus in Nanjing allowed Caulfield Grammar to strengthen ties with the region ''and give students the opportunity to enhance understanding of the [[world]]''—ditto, and what a bad idea to link [[world]]—click on it and see for yourself. Please snip off anything like that, especially from the lead! And "Caulfield boasts"—yeah, probably, all schools do, but please not on wiki. A structural point: IMO the "Scholarships" and "School uniform" sections are much too crufty, they should be seriously shortened. Sections ought surely to be in some proportion to their respective importance, and together, "Scholarships" and "School uniform" aren't far off from being as long as the whole of "Academics". Am I wrong, or is the closeup of an "awards pocket", a feature of the uniform, the biggest image on the whole page..? [[User:Bishonen|Bishonen]] | [[User talk:Bishonen|talk]] 22:37, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC) |
Revision as of 22:37, 26 June 2005
Caulfield Grammar School
Self-nom. This article has been through FAC before and was not promoted, but has been improved and many opposing votes came before the improvements. It has also recently finished peer review, and is one of the best high school articles on Wikipedia. Compare with Stuyvesant High School, also a current FAC, and then have a vote. Thanks. Harro5 22:56, Jun 25, 2005 (UTC)
- Object. This article has many good qualities and sections, but too much promotional POV. I'm sorry I missed commenting on Peer Review, as you don't seem to have gotten any pointers there about that aspect. Please note that I had a similar criticism to make of Stuyvesant High School a little lower down, not because I'm obsessed with the subject (I hope), but because a promotional tone and florid style are unfortunately typical of our school articles. Perhaps they're irresistibly influenced by the fulsomeness of school brochures, I don't know. Both the current school FACs are indeed very much better than the run-of-the-mill school articles and have far less promotional POV; but they're not supposed to have any. Caulfield Grammar School shouldn't be written "from inside" at all, compare Geogre's reasoning about Stuyvesant High School. I mean, "The boarding community is a strong and proud one"? Brrr. The Yarra Junction Campus is now at the forefront of environmental education, as students live in fully sustainable eco-cabins with rainwater tanks and solar power technology"—keep the info, lose the advertising! "the establishment of a campus in Nanjing allowed Caulfield Grammar to strengthen ties with the region and give students the opportunity to enhance understanding of the world—ditto, and what a bad idea to link world—click on it and see for yourself. Please snip off anything like that, especially from the lead! And "Caulfield boasts"—yeah, probably, all schools do, but please not on wiki. A structural point: IMO the "Scholarships" and "School uniform" sections are much too crufty, they should be seriously shortened. Sections ought surely to be in some proportion to their respective importance, and together, "Scholarships" and "School uniform" aren't far off from being as long as the whole of "Academics". Am I wrong, or is the closeup of an "awards pocket", a feature of the uniform, the biggest image on the whole page..? Bishonen | talk 22:37, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)