Talk:Athabasca University
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is part of WikiProject Education in Canada, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to Education in Canada. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. |
 |
Athabasca University was a good article candidate, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. Once the objections listed below are addressed, the article can be renominated. You may also seek a review of the decision if you feel there was a mistake.
Date of review: July 31, 2006 |
[edit] List of programs
I think the inclusion of the list of programs at the university is non-encyclopediac. I think it would be more appropriate if it included a few sentences comparing its programs to those of other universities, and make mention any unique programs it has. If people want to know about individual programs they should go to the website, which is provided on the page. Benw
I re-introduced the reputation section, while I like the other edits that were made, I feel this section is important, as AU has to talk a bit about its reputation, and most articles on a university, for example, McGill University and University of Toronto do it, just in another manner, this article simply has a reputation headline. --
Spinboy 02:20, 18 July 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Age
What is your source for the statement that you must be 18 to study there? According to the Maclean's guide, the minimum is 16. Carolynparrishfan 17:34, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
Since you appear to be either unwilling or unable to support your edit, I have reverted it. Carolynparrishfan 13:27, 19 September 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Good Article nomination has failed
The Good article nomination for Athabasca University has failed, for the following reason:
- This article does not meet Good Article crierion. There is not enough substance here. Many headings are only one paragraph, sometimes one sentence. It is riddled with lists, which in and of themselves aren't bad, but are inferior to prose that would put this information in context. The references are not cited properly. Many of the "facts and trivia" are unverified. The headings are in caps for each word. The reputation section is wholly POV. All in all, it needs a lot of work. Esprit15d 19:32, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
