- The following discussion is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was: promoted by Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:50, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
Marlowe Academy
edit
- ... that the Marlowe Academy (pictured), among "the worst schools in England" in 2011 but showing satisfactory progress in 2012, has a radio station on its site which is open to all pupils on the Isle of Thanet?
Created/expanded by Demiurge1000 (talk). Self nom at 19:17, 15 April 2012 (UTC)
- Hook: Interesting... but why not trim "but showing satisfactory progress in 2012"? AGF on offline source.
- Article: New enough, long enough. Last part of Curriculum section is rather promotional. References are well formatted. Paraphrasing looks okay, compared with this source.
- Summary:
Question and neutrality. Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:46, 16 April 2012 (UTC)
- As far as the hook is concerned, its current format is aimed at following the spirit of not focusing unduly on negative aspects. "amongst the worst schools in England" is very interesting and hooky, it's a fact that an RS described it as having once been such; however the RS in question mentions that in passing and as having been the situation in the past. So focusing the hook entirely on that, with no mention of the RS' description of the current situation, would lack neutrality. (The "satisfactory progress" description is from the exact same RS).
- As far as the article is concerned, what's in the Curriculum section is everything thus far discovered in reliable independent sources about what is taught there and how. The article needs a Curriculum section, or some similar material, to avoid being entirely a discussion of the school's year-by-year league table rankings (which is most of what the RS coverage is about, partly because it's a matter of political conflict). The tech fair part has intentionally been kept very brief, and partly kept in quotes, to reflect that the RS piece concerned was probably based largely on material provided by the school. In other words, readers can make up their own minds about whether "exploding jelly beans and creepy crawlies" are an effective way of focusing on "science, technology and mathematics". I do hope to get some further RS material about curriculum and events, etc., in the future, but for now this is all that's available.
- The longest section of the article covers the school's ongoing problems with performance and league tables; thus the article is balanced and neutral because that is also what the reliable sources spend most of their coverage on.
- Note, I've replaced "amongst" with "among" in the hook. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 14:18, 16 April 2012 (UTC)
- I still think that last section could be rephrased. Perhaps something like "The school also educational events, such as a two-week science fair in 2012." Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:41, 16 April 2012 (UTC)
- Done (mostly). --Demiurge1000 (talk) 18:01, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
Me and my forgetting words. Looks good. Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:37, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
