Wikipedia:Peer review/List of defunct colleges and universities in Kansas/archive1

List of defunct colleges and universities in Kansas

This peer review discussion has been closed.
Please review List of defunct colleges and universities in Kansas--Paul McDonald (talk) 05:20, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

Note: I'll do a full review in a couple of days. In the meantime you could fix a couple of disambiguation links (use the tool on the right to identify), and also try and fix the dead links in refs 6, 37 and 38. Brianboulton (talk) 20:53, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Brianboulton comments: The dablinks seem to have been fixed, but there is still a dead link in ref 30: Midland Lutheran College. Other points:-

Prose

• The form of your first sentence is specifically rejected by WP:MOSBEGIN. Furthermore, the next sentence: "For the purposes of this list..." etc. looks like OR, defining your own terms. There is also considerable redundancy in your wording. I suggest you begin with something like: "This listing of defunct higher education institutions in Kansaa includes accredited, degree-granting institutions and bona fide institutions of higher learning if they operated before accreditation existed. All have hosted their primary campus within the state of Kansas, and all have since discontinued operations."
• After the definition in the opening paragraph the lead should be extend so that it becomes a brief summary of the whole article/list.
• The "List details" section should not be broken up into so many very brief subsections. The prose should not have so many short, one-sentence paragraphs. The bullet-point format should be avoided entirely; thus the "University vs college/school" subsection needs to be rewritten in prose format.

List

• This sentence: "Records for several of the schools have yet to be located and verified at this time of this writing to accurately determine how long the schools operated" makes me wonder whether the article/list is yet ready for peer review. With all the ?? entries in the list, the project still seems very much like work in progress. Is there any special reason why you have sought a peer review at this point, rather than when the project is more developed?
• I am unable to understand some of the entries in the listing. For exampl, what does "Listing found" mean?
• Some of the notes lack citations
• How does Utopia College, which granted only "certificates", fit the definition in your opening paragraph? It's the "only" that bothers me.

See also

• What is the relevance of the second and third entries here?

References

• Look at 4
• Many of the online references are not properly formatted, e.g. 7, 8, etc
• Others do not appear to be high quality reliable sources, e.g. 9, 10 etc
• All online sources should have retrieval dates.

In short, an awful lot of work is still necessary on this list. As I am unable to watch peer reviews at the moment, please contact my talkpage if you have any queries from this review. Brianboulton (talk) 19:05, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

Quick comment

I had looked at this before Brian indicated he would review it. One thing that worried me was citing only one source on the existence of a college, like Central Normal College, and then assuming it had to be defunct, with no other sources of information provided about it. Would it be considered defunct for this list if it had merged with another school or college? What if it had moved and/or changed its name? I suspect not, but unless more sources are provided, there is no way to know what happened to it and others listed here also known from just one source. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 21:19, 8 October 2010 (UTC)