Talk:Lethbridge Collegiate Institute/GA2

GA Review

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

Criteria taken from Wikipedia:Good_article_criteria

1. Well-written

(a) the prose is clear and the spelling and grammar are correct

Several grammatical errors throughout. Here are just a few examples:

• On December 13, 2007, a note was found handwritten in a washroom stall. (should be "On December 13, 2007, a handwritten note was found in a washroom stall.")
• The most advertised is the exchange Japan; LCI regularly exchanges students with Sapporo Commercial High School,[46] an institution which has also been informally twinned with LCI in a program implemented by Alberta Education.

(b) it complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation

Overall:

2. Factually accurate and verifiable

(a) it provides references to all sources of information in the section(s) dedicated to the attribution of these sources according to the guide to layout

References 33, 34 and 44 are dead. This was mentioned in this assessment.

(b) it provides in-line citations from reliable sources for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons-science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines

Contains relevant references and quotations throughout, with additional notes on some content

(c) it contains no original research

Overall:

3. Broad in its coverage

(a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic

(b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style)

Perhaps less detail is required in the Extra-curricular activities section. School song is completely irrelevant considering it is no longer in use.

Overall:

4. Neutral

It represents viewpoints fairly and without bias.

No problems found. Meets this criteria.

Overall:

5. Stable

It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.

No edit wars. Only recent problem was one good faith edit.

Overall:

6. Illustrated, if possible, by images

(a) images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content

File:LCI2.JPG - Public domain, released by creator

File:Lethbridge_Central_School.jpg - Public domain, copyright expired

File:Goshen.png - Some rights reserved (share alike and attribution)

File:LCI_window.jpg - Public domain, released by creator

File:Teamflag1.jpg - Non-free image with fair use rationale

File:LCI22.JPG - Public domain, released by creator.

(b) images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions

File:LCI2.JPG - Relevant; no caption

File:Lethbridge_Central_School.jpg - Relevant (under heading Early years); suitable caption

File:Goshen.png - Somewhat relevant; unable to verify accuracy; caption does not explain image

File:LCI_window.jpg - Relevant; caption may need to be rewritten to include what the stained glass represents

File:Teamflag1.jpg - Irrelevant - caption is sketchy and I cannot see any information in the paragraphs immediately surrounding the image which refer to it. Caption says these logos are embroidered onto most athletics uniforms - perhaps could be moved to Athletics section. No justification for using a non-free image here.

File:LCI22.JPG - Little relevance in illustrating the Performing Arts Centre

Overall:

7. Conclusion

This article does not meet the following points of the good article criteria:

• 1(a)
• 2(a)
• 3(b)
• 6(b)

Overall: - Article fails assessment

Reviewer: tb240904 ^{Talk Contribs} 02:53, 15 June 2010 (UTC)