Talk:California State University, Dominguez Hills/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Jaguar (talk · contribs) 18:37, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

Hi, I will be reviewing this against the GA criteria as part of a GAN sweep. I'll leave some comments soon. JAGUAR  18:37, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguations: No links found.

Linkrot: No linkrot found in this article.

≥===Checking against the GA criteria===

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose, no copyvios, spelling and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

   The first paragraph in the History section is unsourced, as well as the latter three

   "The year 1968 found the student body of CSUDH exceeding 1,000 for the first time" - this doesn't make any sense. Do you mean In 1968, the student body...?

   "In 1977 the California Postsecondary Education Commission endorsed the college trustees’ desire to change the name of the school from California State College, Dominguez Hills to California State University, Dominguez Hills." - this should be merged (and sourced) into the paragraph above it

   "Every year Dominguez Hills hosts the Connecting Women to Power Business Conference" - I think this should be moved to the end of the section

   "CSU Dominguez Hills' athletic teams are known as the Cal State Dominguez Hills Toros" - no need to have this in bold per MOS:BOLD

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

   No original research found.

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

I can see that this article is well written and researched, so I'll leave this on hold until the sourcing issues are addressed. It's close to meeting the criteria. JAGUAR  19:32, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

It's been seven days with no interaction, so I'll close this. JAGUAR  11:28, 11 December 2016 (UTC)