Talk:Aquinas College, Perth/GA1

GA Reassessment

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

Starting GA reassessment as part of the GA Sweeps process. Jezhotwells (talk) 19:01, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Checking against GA criteria

GA review (see here for criteria)

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.

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

   The lead does not fully summarise the article, see WP:LEAD for guidelines.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

   There are a number off deadlinks [1]; those that are live check out; assume good faith for offline sources; references needed for past headmasters, tagged since September 2009.

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   The arts section could possibly benefit from expansion and needs citation.

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

   Sport: In these years, there was no doubt in the minds of Aquinas students that when the rest of the crowd at the inter-school athletics meeting shouted Kill the Micks they meant Aquinas. Given their record of seven wins from 1965–71 in that period, their assumption was justified. If this is waht the source says then quote it directly, otherwise rewrite in neutral language.

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

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

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

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   Ok, on hold for seven days for above issues to be fixed. Jezhotwells (talk) 19:12, 23 January 2010 (UTC)