Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Academia/archive1
This was the article of the week from May 27. Has improved dramatically in that time, and I think it's the first article of the week now good enough for to be nominated as a featured article. (Sort-of a self nomination as I've help organise article of the week) Tom- 22:09, 4 Jun 2004 (UTC)
- Support. Fredrik (talk) 18:24, 5 Jun 2004 (UTC)
- Support. Acegikmo1 21:17, 5 Jun 2004 (UTC)
- Support.
Object (sorry!). It's great that this article has improved so rapidly. (But...) Apologies if I missed something (quite possible), but the article starts by saying that sociologists list four basic types of academia; the article seems to only list three, missing out "academic societies". Could something be mentioned about these?Also, the section on "Practice and Theory" lists some criticisms of academics being Ivory Tower-types; this could do with some rebuttal from the academic-POV for neutrality. Also, there's no discussion of academic conferences and workshops.— Matt 21:33, 5 Jun 2004 (UTC)- This comment was copied to the talk page and discussed. Many people have subsuquently tried to address these issues. →Raul654 03:00, Jun 16, 2004 (UTC)
These objections have been mostly answered. Because I think Featured Articles should have no obvious gaps in their coverage, I'll maintain an "objection" because I agree we need some of information on academic regalia and ceremony (gowns, mortar boards and strange PhD bonnets) as pointed out by User:Isomorphic; see also Web information. I also think that the recently-added "academic-balance-POV sentence" is a little hard to understand: "It just means that taking the reality or perception of academic insularity into account may increase the value of the academian's studies and or opinion when discussing or offering criticism of a practitioner or a practice in general." — Matt 12:13, 16 Jun 2004 (UTC)- Ok, reworked that sentence for clarity. Hows the new one? And also I'd say that to be NPOV a valid criticism doesn't necesarily need a rebuttal anyway, just an acknowledgement. - Taxman 16:23, Jun 16, 2004 (UTC)
- This comment was copied to the talk page and discussed. Many people have subsuquently tried to address these issues. →Raul654 03:00, Jun 16, 2004 (UTC)
- This isn't exactly an objection, but I'd really like to see a little bit about academic traditions and culture, especially academic regalia. Isomorphic 02:10, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)
- Isomorphic, I've expanded the regalia section with an attempt to cover US and UK tradition, but it's a little scanty on the origins of the cap and gown (the origins are a bit murky, as far as I know). Does it address some of your quasi-objection? :-) Jwrosenzweig 18:09, 16 Jun 2004 (UTC)