This one might have a ways to go to be up to speed, but it may be possible to make this happen with some work. Some thoughts on what needs to be done to start. —
Ed!(talk) 04:31, 2 February 2018 (UTC)reply
GA review (see
here for criteria) (see
here for this contributor's history of GA reviews)
It is reasonably well written:
Some needs for work here.
History section should be broken up into subsections. As is it's overly long, and perhaps may be better served as a standalone article.
Campuses section is off to a good start but needs more references.
The history section needs more sources. The beginning of the section is off to a good start, but loses steam pretty quickly as far as references go. The section needs to be extensively cited using reliable third party sources. See
WP:RS.
Significant format fixes needed in the footnotes, some are bare URLs and others are needing additional details like author names, publishers, publication dates and other things. Essential for good sources. See
WP:CITE.
I count 28 dead links. These need to be replaced, or new sources need to be added in their place.
It is broad in its coverage:
History
Too much detail: "Centennial celebration" should be able to be condensed to at most a sentence. Not massively important given the school's long history.
"U.P.A.A. 2008 centennial yearbook" should be removed entirely.
Alumni
Worthwhile to expand that alumni section. How many living alumni? Any big notable names? Of course there is an article, but a summary rather than an empty section is worthwhile for top-level details on the school's alumni community.