Talk:Dhaka Residential Model College

Assessment

I am assessing this article for WikiProject Schools following a request. A nice article, seems to pass the B-class criteria fine. Getting articles to good article/featured article status is not my speciality though there are few suggestions I can give. Some of the article's punctuation needs to be checked, references should be after full stops and commas. Capital letters should normally only be used for proper nouns, and the first letter of section headings and sentences, see WP:MOSCAPS; capital letters seem to be used excessively in some areas e.g. most subject names should not be captialised. Bold is also sometimes overused, see WP:MOSBOLD. The image in the infobox should usually be the school logo, which can be uploaded under a claim of fair use. I have trouble following part of the lead, what a "shift" is needs to be made clearer. Avoid too much detail on one aspect in the lead it should only introduce and summarise the article per WP:LEAD. Some sections such as education are rather list like, per WP:WPSCH/AG#WNTI prose with context to the school is better. The referencing seems okay, though there are a few gaps such as not all alumni having a reference. Also I get the impression that more parameters could be filled in for some refs. I am giving this article Mid-importance for now based on alumni. Camaron · Christopher · talk 10:36, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

I was asked but have little to add to Chris's words. However the quality is high and reflects the effort that must have gone into this article. Do not lose heart when you receive criticism, this deserves to make GA Victuallers (talk) 17:20, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

I note the request for re-assessment. I am not sure what else to add beyond my earlier tips, and not all of them have yet been implemented, though as Victuallers said this is still a good quality article. A GA reviewer will be along shortly to give a review. This article is already at the highest rating, B-class, which can be given outside the GA nomination process. I can however review the importance rating and after a review I have decided there is enough for High-importance. The list of alumni is short, but important people are listed. The school has also had national recognition in areas like debating and academic achievement. Camaron · Christopher · talk 18:44, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Dhaka Residential Model College/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Nasty Housecat (talk) 17:21, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

GA checklist

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose quality:

   Grammar and spellling are ok.

   B. MoS compliance:

   MOS compliance ok.

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. References to sources:

   Needs additional work on references.

   B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

   References are reliable, but need work on formatting.

   C. No original research:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   Needs better coverage of school history.

   B. Focused:

   Too much detail on courses, competitons, and other subjects not of general interest.

4. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

   Reads a bit promotional. Could use more work on WP:NPOV

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

   Stable. No edit wars.

6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

   OTRS pending tag should be replaced with OTRS approval before renominating.

   B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:

   Images are appropriate and good quality. Captions could be improved. See WP:CAPTION

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

• Comments: I have noticed the poor quality of the image of DRMC Debate team. So I've removed that. Furthermore I've just used the photos only taken by me in the article except the logo (which can't be gained without a copyrighted one). -- Tanweer ^{(talk|contributions)} 07:38, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Response: DRMC_football_team.JPG is copyright of the school and attribution is not enough. The school will have to confirm permission to use it with an email. See WP:PERMISSION. Once the email is sent, you can use the {{OTRS pending}} tag while permission is confirmed by OTRS volunteers. This is the required procedure for any image you take from the website (or any other copyrighted source).

The logo is fine, but you need to include a Fair Use Rationale for this article. See WP:LOGO. Use the {{Logo fur]}} template for best results. --Nasty Housecat (talk) 00:36, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Summary Comments:I am sorry to say that the article still has a ways to go to meet the GA criteria. The prose is much improved thanks to good copyediting, but there are issues with the remaining criteria that will prevent promotion at this time. Please see my comments below and please take them constructively. I recognize the hard work you have put into this piece and encourage you to continue to improve it.

My suggestion would be to address all of the concerns noted here , submit the article to another peer review, and address all of the suggestions you receive there before re-nominating this for GA again. I believe that will help you improve the article substantially.

General:

• You have not fully addressed Brianboulton’s excellent peer review suggestions. It still reads like a lot like promotional material. For example, the exhaustive list of departments and subjects is of no interest to the general reader and the information on debate and quiz is overly detailed. The history of the school is very thin, although that would probably be of most interest to an encyclopedia reader.

• There is a lot of overlinking going on. Terms that most English speakers will understand should not be linked. Examples include: DRMC (don’t link the article to itself), medical examination, library, book, newspaper, magazine, laundry. There are may others. Also avoid linking the same term more than once.

• The referencing is spotty. Better referencing is need throughout the article. Examples here include: who says it is the largest campus in Dhaka? Why is Zainul Abedin “intellectual or reknowned”? There are many other such claims that need references.

• Some paragraphs have no reference at all. The rule of thumb is to reference all quotes, major claims, statistics, and at least one per paragraphs.

Lead:

• “By the then government of Pakistan.” Why “then”? Many readers will not understand the history of Bangladesh.

• The lead should summarize the article. The rule of thumb is that every section heading should be mentioned in some way. See WP:LEAD.

History:

• This section needs to be expanded quite a bit. Why did the school change hands? Why add another session? Why change things after independence?\

• Delete the board information. It is not of general interest.

• What does “intermediate level mean”? What is III to XII grades? These are not familiar to people from different educational systems.

Admissions:

• “Admission tests at the primary and lower secondary levels are competitive as well.” What does this mean?

• “Students of at the end of primary level gets the opportunity to appear for the primary scholarship examination. And the students at the end of lower secondary level can appear for the junior scholarship examination as well.” What does that mean? Needs some explanation.

Curriculum:

• Avoid using the “&.” Use the word “and”.

• The list of subjects and departments is not encyclopedic. All schools do these things. Tell us what makes the school interesting, unusual, special.

• The academic performance section needs a lot of explanation. Foreigners (Americans for sure) will have no idea what any of these things are.

Extracurricular Activities:

• There is way too much detail here, and again, non-native readers will not understand what many of these events are. Why are they important and interesting? Are they top finishes in national events? If not, why are they notable?

References:

• All references should have a publisher and, where available, a date. This is missing from many of the references.

External links:

• You should delete most of these except the official school website. See WP:EL.

Thanks for all your work on this article and please do not allow this to discourage you from continuing to contribute and renominate your work when it is ready. Best regards.

--Nasty Housecat (talk) 02:23, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

SMasters and Celestra, thank you.

SMaster, I see that you have been doing heavy-duty copywriting on this article.

Celestra, thank you for finding my error. I knew it had to be obscure, but I sure couldn't find it!

I had made a TINY start and was feeling overwhelmed; I put the article aside for a few days and the issue was solved for me!!! (I was also looking at MoS on lists, because one of his bits of feedback said that prose should be used rather than lists, so I was trying to resolve the list issue in the History section.)

I appreciate the work you've done on behalf of the author. (My daughter's boyfriend is Bengali, so I felt some connection.)

I'm going to toss my printed off copy and keep my mitts off this project! Bettymnz4 (talk) 23:25, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

It was a pleasure to be able to help. :-) -- S Masters (talk) 15:00, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Clarification & comments

I'm doing another full copy edit of this article before it goes to WP:PR. I need some points clarified.

• The school was set up in 1960 by the then Government of Pakistan (Bangladesh was part of Pakistan until 1971), as a special type of institution - only one of its category in Bangladesh... - What is this category? This sentence structure is not correct. I need to know about the category before I can restructure the sentence.
• It has its own rules of business where the Board of Governors has been empowered to “frame rules as it deems necessary for the proper functioning of the school." - What does "rules of business" mean? Should it be "own operating procedures"?

Other Notes:

• I don't have time at the moment to check for consistency. Sometimes the grades are in roman numerals, and sometimes not. Decide which to use and stick to it throughout.
• Some picture captions have periods and some don't. Do one or the other. Done.

-- S Masters (talk) 18:33, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Reply

• I found the information on the school's website. So far as I know, the category is something like a system where the Government plays a significant role in high level decision-making and management related affairs of the school. Locally this category is called Autonomous institution. But that doesn't mean that the school is also wholly funded by the government. Actually the school is funded by both the students and the government, where the govt. aid isn't less important at all. I think it should be better to mention the category as "Autonomous" though I am not sure whether this type of school exists in USA or in any countries of the world.

• Here, the phrase (rules of business) has been used to indicate that the process or way it performs or undertakes necessary decision. You are not wrong, it's approximately like that. So you can mention "own operating procedure".

• I prefer using words (e.g. third grade, sixth grade etc.), not numerals. If you don't have enough time, I can do that. Tanweer (talk) 19:17, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

I have fixed the above. The copy edit is now complete. Good luck with the WP:PR and let me know if you need any more help. Cheers. -- S Masters (talk) 09:41, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

• Except in winter, the uniform for students from grades VI to XII is short sleeved white shirt with white trousers. For students from grades XII to V,... - This part has not been fixed. Is the last part correct? 12-5? -- S Masters (talk) 23:38, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Yes, it's correct. -- Tanweer (talk) 16:26, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

This doesn't make sense: Except in winter, the uniform for students from grades six to twelve, is short sleeved white shirt with white trousers. For students from grades twelve to five, the uniform is short sleeved white shirt with navy blue half pants. -- S Masters (talk) 05:28, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Oh, sorry. I didn't notice the point. It was nothing but a mistake. I've made correction in the Uniform section. Thanks for showing me the inconsistent sentence. -- Tanweer (talk) 12:23, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Dhaka Residential Model College/GA3. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Nasty Housecat (talk) 03:40, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Hi. I'll be doing the GA review. --Nasty Housecat (talk) 03:40, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Review comments

This article is so improved since the last GAN that I hardly recognize it. Great work! I have a few minor comments, but I think it is looking very good:

• I do not think Banglapedia counts as WP:RS. As a tertiary source, it can only be used for summary or overview comments, not detailed discussion. Can you find secondary sources instead?
• Is it possible the transliterate the Bangladeshi titles in the references for English speakers?
• In several places you use multiple citations. That is overkill unless the material is highly controversial (nothing here is). Just pick the best one and use that. For the alumni, you can use two if you need one for notability and another for attendance.
• The DRMC football photo is not great. There is not much to see. Can you find a more compelling image for that section?
• The article is redundant in places. You discuss the administration, the schedule, and the exams in more than one place. Can you consolidate those discussions so each one is mainly covered in just one section?
• There is a sentence which reads: "The housemaster and prefects have opportunities to make announcements…" What does that mean?
• The lead images sandwich the text. You should remove one of them. I suggest keeping the Ayub Khan photo. You have lots of buildings already.

--Nasty Housecat (talk) 00:35, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

I have no doubt Banglapedeia is a very well done encyclopedia. However, as tertiary sources, no encyclopedia is considered a reliable source for detailed discussion -- even Wikipedia itself. Please see WP:PRIMARY for more explanation. If the Banglapedia articles reference secondary sources, it should be fairly easy to research and cite those resources yourself in lieu of the encyclopedia article.

Regarding transliteration, ref 34 is the only one I see that lacks one.

--Nasty Housecat (talk) 13:06, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Sorry for not noticing this before: I see that you using shortened footnotes for Shandipan and Srijon, but there is no reference for them. I don't even see a full citation for them. See WP:CITESHORT for the correct way to do this. Baltimore City College is a good example, too. Fix that, and I believe all of the issues will be addressed. --Nasty Housecat (talk) 19:26, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

 Done -- Tanweer (talk) 14:16, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Wait. I'm confused. I thought these were books. Are these magazine articles? If so, what are the article names? And you should reference by author, not publication. For the full references use, for example: Hossain, M (2002). "Article Name," Srijon. For the short references, you would use: Hossain 2002, p.11. (Look at the Scientific American example at WP:CITESHORT). Do this only for articles you cite more than once. For things only cited once, use the full {{cite news}} template in the footnote as you do elsewhere. Make sense? --Nasty Housecat (talk) 19:19, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

OK. I went ahead and fixed refs 57 and 58 so you can see what it should look like. You should fix refs 59-63 in the same fashion. Since these are all articles, you will not need the works cited section at all. Just use the ref name tag (like you did on 57) if you use the same source more than once. --Nasty Housecat (talk) 21:53, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

GA checklist

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose quality:

   Reasonably well written

   B. MoS compliance:

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. References to sources:

   Generally well referenced

   B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

   See comments

   C. No original research:

   No OR

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   Comprehensive school article

   B. Focused:

   Does not digress

4. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

   Neutrally presented

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

   Very stable

6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

   Image tags OK

   B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:

   Images all OK now

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

   Meets the GA standard. Pass.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Dhaka Residential Model College. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110622070753/http://www.newagebd.com/2009/apr/25/met.html to http://www.newagebd.com/2009/apr/25/met.html#2
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110622070817/http://www.newagebd.com/2007/may/18/met.html to http://www.newagebd.com/2007/may/18/met.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

N An editor has determined that the edit contains an error somewhere. Please follow the instructions below and mark the |checked= to true

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 09:06, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Dhaka Residential Model College. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120112084537/http://www.prothom-alo.com/detail/date/2010-01-31/news/38861 to http://www.prothom-alo.com/detail/date/2010-01-31/news/38861

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:47, 12 December 2016 (UTC)