Wikipedia:Peer review/University High School (Los Angeles, California)/archive2

University High School (Los Angeles, California)

This article had a prior peer review done by Wikipedia:WikiProject Schools. At the time, the article appeared as though it was going to be put up as a GAC but the reviewer from WikiProject Schools but nothing ever happened.

Since that time, two sections have been added and images have finally been added to the article, so it seems like a good time for a review. I am also requesting re-assessments from the various wikiprojects that this article belongs to. Miss Mondegreen | Talk   23:35, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Comments from WikiProject Schools

• This article has come a long way since I reviewed it last. The Alumni list could stand to be trimmed and several of the sections could be expanded, but I would say GA is now warranted. Adam McCormick 05:09, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

• What would you suggest? At the moment we are using WP:Notable for inclusion standards, and in cases where I've had questions I've gone to the wikiprojects in question. For example, I'm currently asking WikiProject Baseball to weigh in about a number of alumni. The list isn't even close to being complete, and even making the notability standards more stringent won't help much, it's an old Los Angeles school and you can see that when you look at the alumni--a number of them were notable before attending the school (entertainment careers). Would a different way of organizing this help possibly? Miss Mondegreen | Talk   07:36, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
• Also, I have my own to-do list, but any sections in particular that you think are important to expansion? Miss Mondegreen | Talk   07:39, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

• The most important sections, in my opinion, are the History and Curriculum sections. The best thing to do if you can't trim the alimni would be to split them into subheadings and then collapse them with {{hidden}} Adam McCormick 16:31, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

• I've already commented on the talk page. The existing content is very good and well referenced. However, I don't think this article is ready for GA status just yet. It is currently missing sections on the school's curriculum and on extra-curricular activities. The history section should be expanded. The page also needs some basic statistics about the number of children at the school, the ages of the children, etc. A more comprehensive infobox might help. Some phrases need explaining more fully to make them intelligible to non-American readers.Dahliarose 10:01, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

• I've expanded the infobox--tell me what you think.
• The phrases are not American as such, if you are referring to CAP (capacity adjustement program) etc.--they are specified education terms that are used in some parts of some of America's public school systems. Most of the terms used as such hopefully make sens in context and I believe that they are all wikilinked. Unfortunately for the CAP term, there's no article as of yet, but there's a limit to the background that can be given about a school system in a school article.
• I also replied to some of your comments on the talk page, so replying here or there is good with me. Miss Mondegreen | Talk   10:23, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Other

Comment from Twenty Years

The article seems to be quite good, but a few problems:

• Does the school not have a logo? if yes, it needs to go into the infobox.
• Location - Shorten it, just say the suburb, state and country at most.
• Information - (im aussie) i resume that is a US telephone number? - un encyclopedic - delete it
• I prefer the student number to be rounded to the nearest 100 with a tilde before it.
• I dont like the dead wikilinks that are spread around the article - i think it looks a tad messy.
• the lead doesnt summarise the article too well - possible re-write
• Per WP:SCH, i think that the Native American heritage should be put into a section entitled "Campus" and include all future developments etc, current projects (building)
• History section is far too breif. Double it.
• Copyright issues with the History section image
• Ficus tree preservation should be chopped up and thrown into the campus section (mentioned above)
• Neighbourhoods served section - delete it, its useless and unencyclopedic - possibly if you make a students section per WP:SCH, you may throw a little of the information in there.
• The article has alot of good references, but in parts it is over-referenced - there are four references to the ficus tree (p1 - bottom), this looks messy. Possibly use the best reference of the lot - and get rid of the other three, unless there are some controversial things there, one reference will be fine.
• Filming on campus - the lists should be broken down - it looks crappy - possibly could do with a picture of the filming crews.
• Lead - i think the first sentence would be better like this: University high school, informally known as Uni is a .... etc - this has worked well with a number of articles i have worked on that are GA.
• Some things that need to be put into the article - scholarships on offer, academic programs, sporting programs (associations the school is involved in), special programs run at the school (eg. excellent community service program).
• Other that that (stated above) the article seems a border-line Start-B Class article. If you have any questions/queries about what ive said - just visit my user talk page. Good luck with the article Twenty Years 16:10, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

• School logo is the mascot logo, and that picture is already in the article in the mascots section. I was going to run by the school today or tomorrow to take a picture of the front of the school to use in the infobox. Would that be ok?
• I was following wikiproject schools when I included the full address and the phone number for the school.
• Filming on campus list--broken down how? Do you have any suggestions? There is a picture of the film crews, but it would be yet another fair use image. I can attempt to get permission to come onto campus during school hours to get a photograph of the film crews, but the administration will probably not approve that.
• In re the ficus tree references, the reason there is one line that ends with multiple references, is that each reference discusses one of the facts that is stated in that sentence and only one.
• The neighborhoods served part is not unencyclopedic, but it's lacking the information that frames it properly. The school was built immediately after the annexation of Sawtelle, and what neighboorhoods it has served has been an issue of some controversy ever since, as is the case with a lot of Los Angeles schools. Unfortunately, I don't know the whole story, nor do I have sources for the parts I do--but it involves population shifting and bussing programs and it is important. And it is covered in the media. Miss Mondegreen | Talk   00:22, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
• Too many redlinks? Really? Well I think some of them are important, but if anyone spots anything they think is really unnecessary, feel free. I'm heading out the door to try and get a photo of the school for the infobox, and then I'll try and get some editing and writing in. Miss Mondegreen | Talk   00:47, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Reply

• That would be fine - because to use the mascot logo twice would be poor form, and i think that its fine to have a picture of the front of the school in there. Plano Senior High School (FA) has that.
• Location/Phone - fair enough - seems somewhat unencyclopedic to me, but meh.
• List of films etc. I meant for it to be broken down so it isnt a list. Eg. instead of "The school has had these films shot on campus: then a bullet-point list". It might be better to use something like: "The school has had various films shot on campus over the years, more prominent examples include; Johnny Film, Mary Film and Berts Brother". (just filter out the poor grammar etc).
• With the trees bit (my view): only the bit about the 1200 signatures, and possibly the community involvement. This will limit the references to two. Because to have so many reference marks looks messy. (This was said to me when i went a tad overboard and referenced everything multiple times on Aquinas College, Perth - some bits upto 6 times).
• I just noticed, you are correct. I thought it was a private school. Hence etc. D/W.
• The red links are links to articles that wikipedia doesnt have. So unless those articles are made, id avoid having them there. I personally think its messy, but thats prob just me.
• Good luck with the photo :) Any other probs, msg me. Twenty Years 05:24, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
• In regard to the lead: "if you had 30 seconds to summarise the article, what would you say?" wors well. Scotch College, Perth and Aquinas College, Perth (both GA) have good examples of leads. Twenty Years 05:38, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

• Hmmm, filming. Unfortunately, as you can probably tell, I only have the data of what was filmed there from the last couple years, and it's probably incomplete--the school newspaper didn't report every time classes were disturbed. I have a feeling that listing more prominent examples might be a bad idea--because that will barely limit the list and people will argue about prominence. What I'll try to do instead is get a complete list of everything that has filmed at the school, so instead I can write a paragraph (filming started yada, yada, yada, and include basic facts like how many films and tv shows, and then include a few things that are of more prominence in relation to the school--like 7th heaven.)
• with the trees bit, one reference is for the signatures, one for two of the communites, the other for the city of santa monica, and the last one isn't strictly necessary, but it's the latimes article on the affair, and of course, one of the products of the community involvement. Perhaps that could go in a different section--additional reading?
• I don't understand: "I just noticed, you are correct. I thought it was a private school. Hence etc. D/W."--can you translate?
• I removed some red links, but while they may be an eyesore, wikipedia is living and breathing and redlinks help it grow--it would be great if everything we needed or wanted linked was blue, if that much content had been created--but until that time, we red link and say "write this article"
• Do you have any ideas for what to do about the enormous alum list? Miss Mondegreen | Talk   13:37, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

• The alumni can easily be collapsed with categorical subheadings and {tl|hidden}} tags. That way they can still be looked at on the page but there aren't pages and pages of links at the bottom. Adam McCormick 20:24, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

• All i think with the films is to just de-list them - so there arent bullet points. So it says: "filmed at the school were X, Y Z & J"
• Id just go with the one for the 1200 signatures, and maybe the communities.
• I thought it was a private school - and the communities served was crappy - but its about a public school so it is noteworthy.
• Yep, the red links are prob fine for now, maybe you might be interested in creating them as stubs (i did that for a school i was working on - it was a good experience.
• Id just leave the alumni list. Its not that big, and if you looked harder, there would be many more. Best wishes. Twenty Years 01:47, 25 April 2007 (UTC)