Talk:Church Street station (MBTA)/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review[edit]

GA toolbox
Reviewing

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: ArnabSaha (talk · contribs) 20:35, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]


GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

  1. Is it well written?
    A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
    B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
  2. Is it verifiable with no original research?
    A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:
    B. All in-line citations are from reliable sources, including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines:
    C. It contains no original research:
    D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
    B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
  4. Is it neutral?
    It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
  5. Is it stable?
    It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
  6. Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
    A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
    B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:

Comments[edit]

  • Why is the name in infobox written in caps?  Saha ❯❯❯ Stay safe  14:55, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • That style is applied to all MBTA station articles to match the style of actual station signage. There's been some back-and-forth about that; I don't have a particular opinion, but it's probably outside the scope of a single GA.
      • Maybe you can write is like, "Church Street station (stylised as CHURCH STREET) is an under-construction"  Saha ❯❯❯ Stay safe  19:19, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
        • I don't think that's necessary; it's only stylized that way on station signs and not in sources. Again, this is a discussion that would affect over 300 MBTA station articles, so it's not really in scope here.
  • Replace the bolded words with " "  Saha ❯❯❯ Stay safe  14:55, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    •  Partly done I left Acushnet station bold per MOS:BOLDREDIRECT. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 17:10, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wikilink the first New Bedford, Boston etc. words in the body.  Saha ❯❯❯ Stay safe  14:58, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    •  Done
  • Change citation [8] to sentence case (MOS:ALLCAPS)  Saha ❯❯❯ Stay safe  15:02, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    •  Done
  • Disabled access mentioned in infobox, but not in body. Also it doesnt have citation.
    •  Done Added to the station layout section, as it's covered in the existing citation.
  • "The former Acushnet station, located..." - this introduction of Acushnet station feels a bit abrupt. While reading for the first time, I was unable to find its connection with Church Street station.  Saha ❯❯❯ Stay safe 
    •  Done Added a couple words to clarify.

@ArnabSaha: Thanks for the review! I've replied to your comments above. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 17:10, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Pi.1415926535: I feel other than these minor things, the article is fine.  Saha ❯❯❯ Stay safe  19:19, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@ArnabSaha: Replied above. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 21:22, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Passed 13:41, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Church_Street_station_(MBTA)/GA1&oldid=1068626648"