Talk:Wye College

Untitled

can someone get all my changes back? I made masses and read a whole book on the sage of Wye College. All seems lost because a 'bot' did not like a link to wordpress. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.145.250.41 (talk) 22:26, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

The link to the founder ("John Kempe"), is to the wrong one, it should be the archbishop "John Kemp" (without the e). PJJ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.186.224.227 (talk) 18:28, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Think dealt with now. Ed1964 (talk) 00:53, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

COI

One of 30+ articles created/edited for pay. I have tagged this for COI; the tag can can come off after an independent editor reviews for NPOV and sourcing. Please leave a note here when you do that. Jytdog (talk) 05:16, 8 May 2015 (UTC) (amended Jytdog (talk) 18:05, 18 May 2015 (UTC))

I Batterbu wrote most of this, and I was a humble student there once with no other conflict of interest. I read the book mentioned about the saving of the village. 188.30.193.152 (talk) 17:31, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

a) since you are the creator you should not remove the COI tag. b) the COI tag is not due to your editing. Jytdog (talk) 18:05, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

More balanced now Ed1964 (talk) 00:52, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

I have deleted the cat for now banned User:Worthywords on the basis none of their 2015 content remains and they are unlikely to come back now that their client has vacated the premises. Ed1964 (talk) 02:22, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

Sourcing

User:79.66.124.255 about these changes - you need to base changes on reliable sources. Please see WP:VERIFY and [{WP:RS]]. Please discuss, if you don't understand. Thanks. Jytdog (talk) 00:22, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

Unsourced

the following entries to the "notable people" section are unsourced:

• Carolyn Hardy OBE, VMH; BA 1952; Chair National Gardens Scheme 1979-1986 and vice-chair Royal Horticultural Society for 10 years
• Prof. David Leaver, Professor of Agriculture at Wye, and then Principal and Chief Executive of the Royal Agricultural College (until 2007).
• The gardener Christopher Lloyd, BA 1949, and lecturer until 1954.
• John Seymour, alumnus. Widely published exponent of self-sufficiency and small scale farming.
• Prof. Eunice Simmons, Pro Vice Chancellor Academic, Nottingham Trent University. (MSc & PhD Wye, Senior Warden of Withersdane Hall, and Lecturer until the mid 2000s)

-- Jytdog (talk) 23:30, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

 These are sorted now. Ed1964 (talk) 14:02, 15 June 2022 (UTC)

Restructure

I have restructured the article removing some duplication, hopefully to make slots for new material and sources. User:Ed1964|Ed1964]] (talk) 15:11, 11 June 2022 (UTC)

GA Review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

This review is transcluded from Talk:Wye College/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Chiswick Chap (talk · contribs) 15:40, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

Comments

I'm really sorry but I've never seen anything so clearly over-edited as this article. The nominator has devoted some six months and well over 4,000 edits to expanding the article, on a now-closed college, from its status as a compact 19,000 byte piece at the start of June 2022 to a definitely oversized 212,000 bytes by February 2023. That is a commendable amount of effort, but the result has been that the article has grown to an unreadable size, the text interspersed by over 20 tables and several quite long lists. Contributing to the feeling of overgrowth is the key to a layout plan, not necessarily unencyclopedic in itself, with a list of 24 locations and 25 abbreviations or acronyms. The reader might well wonder whether they needed to know the location of Lecture Room C or of Administration and Ly-E "Library Entrance", not to mention T "Telephone". Something, in short, has gone seriously wrong here in terms of filtering of information, selecting what was necessary for a coherent, concise and readably encyclopedic article, and one that was instead grossly listlike, indiscriminate, and hopelessly overlong for the topic.

An extreme example of the article's hypertrophy and lack of appropriate selection or structure is in the section "Wye College", where the many short paragraphs give an extremely choppy effect, accentuated by the seven chronological tables that break the text up further with boldface dates and sentence fragments. Does the reader really need to know that in 1964 a "Two storey biological science laboratories [were] built facing onto Olantigh Road": it is one of many minor but space-filling details that clutter the article.

To give another example, "In 2021 Telereal Trillium obtained planning permission to convert the traditional college buildings"... this is cited, and would do as a statement; what will not do is the text that follows, consisting of four italicised (?) headings and five bullet-points on the conversion, all of which is plainly WP:UNDUE.

The Good article criteria state that "An article can be failed without further review (known as a quick fail) if, prior to the review:

    1. It is a long way from meeting any one of the six good article criteria".

• Criterion 1. "Well-written" requires that a. the prose is clear and concise, while
• Criterion 3b. requires that "it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style)."

It seems quite clear that this article is not at all concise at the moment (indeed, the June 2022 text was arguably closer to what would be needed for a Good Article than the current text), and that it goes "into unnecessary detail" throughout its length.

An experienced editor with some GAs under their belt could probably perform the needed cutting and restructuring in quite short order, but given that this appears to be the nominator's first GAN, I think more time will probably be needed for the necessary revision or rewriting, and indeed for the needed degree of detachment from the current text, given their remarkable investment of time and effort. I am as I said above therefore sorry but I think it will be best to quick-fail this article now, with no prejudice at all against its renomination once the article has been reworked as described. Chiswick Chap (talk) 15:40, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.