Talk:Michigan State University Libraries

Latest comment: 6 years ago by InternetArchiveBot in topic External links modified (January 2018)
Former good articleMichigan State University Libraries was one of the Social sciences and society good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Did You Know Article milestones
DateProcessResult
April 24, 2007Good article nomineeListed
March 2, 2010Good article reassessmentDelisted
June 26, 2010Good article nomineeNot listed
Did You Know A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on April 22, 2007.
The text of the entry was: Did you know ...that Michigan State University Libraries has the largest catalogued collection of comic books in the world, with over 150,000 items?
Current status: Delisted good article

GA Reassessment

edit
This discussion is transcluded from Talk:Michigan State University Libraries/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the reassessment.

I will do the GA Reassessment of this article as part of the GA Sweeps project. H1nkles (talk) 16:13, 23 February 2010 (UTC)Reply

I will make comments on the article as I progress through it.

  • Per WP:Lead the lead needs to summarize all parts of the article. I don't see anything in the lead about the various libraries outside the main library. The lead should be examined and expanded to cover all of the article.
  • There are quite a few grammatical and prose issues that I am running into as I read. I'm fixing some of them but as I continue I see more and more. For example this sentence, "Library materials from all African countries (less so for North Africa) are collected at a high level, also materials in all African and other languages and across all historical periods." doesn't make sense to me and should be reworded. Another example is here, "A significant portion of the collection is presently uncataloged and, therefore, does not appear in the Libraries' catalog." This is a repetitive sentence. A thorough prose edit should be undertaken, a GA shouldn't have the number of issues I'm coming across.
  • There are several external links in the body of the article that link out to the various library's main pages. These should be moved to the bottom in an external links section.
  • The references all seem to be from around 2007. There are quite a few stats given in the article with older references, can these stats be updated with more current information? As a reader when I am reading the stats and then see that the reference was last accessed in 2007 it makes me wonder if the stats are really accurate.
  • On that same vein there are several dead links in the reference section. You can see them here [1]. The red lines are dead links that need to be repaired. I count six in the references with another dead external link. These will need to be repaired.
  • Re: reference formatting, for websites it is important to have at least the site name, publisher, and accessdate, most of the references do not have the publisher. Other important information would include author, date, and work.

Overall I think the article has what it takes to be a GA but needs some work to keep it consistent with the GA Criteria. I will hold the article for a week pending work and notify interested projects and editors. If you have any questions or concerns please contact me on my talk page. H1nkles (talk) 16:40, 23 February 2010 (UTC)Reply

Since no work has been done on this review I will delist. H1nkles (talk) 15:43, 2 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

GA Review

edit
This review is transcluded from Talk:Michigan State University Libraries/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer:Eustress talk 12:05, 26 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

I commend the nominating editor for improvements to the article since its last GAR, but I regret that I must quick-fail GA attempt #2. The main reasons are as follows:

  1. Ninety-nine percent of the article's sources are from MSU -- definitely not in accordance with WP:RS and raises issues for WP:N
  2. Several portions have been copy-and-pasted from their sources (e.g., the entire LIR Library section, the first sentence of the Africana section, etc.). This was noted on this talk page over three years ago (see here) and has never been addressed.
  3. The article is broad in coverage at a superficial level. For example, the Fine Arts section does not really communicate anything of encyclopedic value.
  4. The following two images are also potentially in violation of copyright law (they appear to be owned by MSU), so they either need to be removed or permission for their use documented via WP:OTRS before this article can be eligible for GA status: File:Michigan State University Libraries Main Building.JPG, File:MSU Libraries Special Collections.jpg.

These are substantial issues that will take longer than a week to address, so a quick-fail here is merited. —Eustress talk 12:46, 26 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 10 external links on Michigan State University Libraries. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:01, 29 January 2018 (UTC)Reply