Talk:University of Glasgow/GA1

GA Reassessment

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
This article has been reviewed as part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles/Project quality task force in an effort to ensure all listed Good articles continue to meet the Good article criteria. In reviewing the article, I have found there are some issues that may need to be addressed, listed below. I will check back in seven days. If these issues are addressed, the article will remain listed as a Good article. Otherwise, it may be delisted (such a decision may be challenged through WP:GAR). If improved after it has been delisted, it may be nominated at WP:GAN. Feel free to drop a message on my talk page if you have any questions, and many thanks for all the hard work that has gone into this article thus far.

What's in this article looks reasonable, but unfortunately it's almost all uncited, thus failing GA criterion 2.

There are at least 11 dead links.[1]

There has been an unaddressed request for citation since October 2008.

All dated claims need to be put into context. For instance the lead says "Glasgow is currently the only university in Scotland with a full range of professional departments ...". As of when? 2009?

The two sections on sports clubs are too short to standalone and should be merged.

"Glasgow has led the UK's university debating culture since 1953." Really? Extraordinary claims like that one need to be backed up by reliable sources.

--Malleus Fatuorum 19:38, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Madcoverboy (talk)

The article has a variety of style and neutrality issues that need to be addressed: "The University of Glasgow is a public research university principally located in Glasgow, Scotland.

Lead sentence should state where the institution is located and distinguishing categories.
Preponderance of unattributed rankings and general peacockery and boosterism in the lead are inconsistent and give entirely undue weight: is it top seventeen, top ten, top 20, ...? Strike all of this out and actually describe the university's history, campus, programs, athletics, alumni, etc. not what wags at a magazine think of it.
Reputation is self-evidently POV and needs to be summarized and non-rankings related material spun out into appropriate sections (financial endowment to Administration and organization, student body to a Student body section, etc.)
Remove table of historic rankings as this is unencyclopedic information
Embedded list under faculties needs to be prose-ified or removed
Article lacks any description of academic programs & degrees, enrollment statistics, honors, etc.
Description of students needs to be expanded to include notable clubs and groups, intercollegiate or club athletics, etc.
No discussion of research activities, intellectual traditions, institutional economic impact, etc.

Closing review

As these issues remain outstanding, and there appears to be no work in progress to address them, this article has now been delisted. --Malleus Fatuorum 21:26, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.