This review is transcluded from Talk:Napier Technical College (New Zealand)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Panamitsu (talk · contribs) 11:07, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: Cloventt (talk · contribs) 08:05, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

   I would make some adjustments to improve the flow of the prose (details below). Grammar and spelling are mostly all good. The list of notable alumni is appropriate in my opinion.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable, as shown by a source spot-check.

   a (reference section): b (inline citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):

   Checked 10 sources at random, all seemed good and reliable to me. Please consider using the archive-url= parameter to link to archived versions of sources, to avoid Link rot. Also consider explicitly naming references rather than using positional `:0` syntax.

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

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

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

   The picture of the Woolworths supermarket does not really enhance the article in my opinion. Otherwise the images are great.

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   This is a very good article that only just falls short of the required standard from my perspective. There are only some minor adjustments I would suggest to get it over the line.

Adjustments I would make in the lead section are:

• Include the educational level of the school in first sentence. "Technical education college" does not tell me as a reader whether this was an institute for children, teenagers or adults. I would use something like "secondary and post-secondary technical college", and preferably link to the Vocational school page.
• I would adjust the second sentence to read closer to "...and after the 1931 Hawke's Bay earthquake killed nine students and destroyed the school buildings, it was disestablished...". To me this flows better.
• The second paragraph of the lead feels disconnected from the first. The first paragraph pretty much covers the entire timeline of the school, which leaves the reader uncertain what time period the second paragraph refers to. These could be reworked into a single paragraph in my opinion.

Adjustments I would make in the History section are:

• First sentence of the History section feels a bit off. Something like "was established" instead of "started" and "to replace" instead of "which replaced" would make it flow better.
• "That year, due to regulations, a third of the board was randomly selected to step down." What regulations? Why? Was this a change in regulation, or just "business as usual"? This topic could be expanded to explain more of the context of how and why this happened.

Adjustments I would make in the Earthquake section:

• "These were taken from student Harry Pond as he was being rescued from the collapsed building." This feels like a weird detail, or is perhaps strangely phrased. Were they stripping his clothes off him as they rescued him? The source clarifies that they were "cut off him by medical staff". I would maybe clarify in the earlier clause that the uniform was damaged during the earthquake, as a result of being cut from the student as he was rescued.

(By the way, this is my first ever GA review. If I have made some horrible mistake in the process, please let me know. I'm happy for a more experienced reviewer to review my review.)

(Issues were all resolved, gets a pass from me ).