Talk:Down Street tube station/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: Ritchie333 (talk · contribs) 18:42, 4 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]


I'd never heard of this tube station before, despite having travelled on this section of the Piccadilly Line more times than I can remember. So this will be an interesting review:

Lead[edit]

  • The infobox could use a caption explaining that picture shows the distinctive UERL house style red brickwork
  • The third paragraph is only one sentence long and could be easily merged with the second.
  • "Little used, trains often passed through the station without stopping" - the grammar here is a little confusing. Perhaps "The station was little used and trains often passed through the station without stopping." (and ending the sentence) would be better?

Operation[edit]

  • I think it would be worth putting the location up front, as I was going to report it as missing until I spotted it halfway down the paragraph. Perhaps also it would be worth mentioning its proximity to the Old Park Lane
  • Underground Electric Railways Company of London should be mentioned in full with "(UERL)" afterwards, then just "UERL" thereafter
  • "22.2 metres (73ft) below the surface of Piccadilly" - this might be slightly confusing, I'm wondering if "22.2 metres (73ft) below street level on Piccadilly" might be better?
  • "With Dover Street station only..." - I think the "only" here is superfluous, same issue with Hyde Park Corner later in the sentence
  • "the neighbouring stations were also close by" - I think this would be better going at the start of the sentence (with a semicolon to the next bit). We've just been told where nearby stations are, so to say this afterwards is obvious, whereas saying it before is stating a fact and then expanding on it.
  • "one of the stations mooted" - "suggested" might be a better word than "mooted"
  • To avoid repetition, could one of the "modified"s in the last paragraph be changed to another word?

Use in media[edit]

  • I'm not sure what specific relevance the fictional tube map has to this section
    • I think it has just ended up here so as not to crowd the earlier sections. I think it can be removed and left in the commons.--DavidCane (talk) 18:29, 6 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Most of this section resembles a bulleted list without the bullets. This probably wants reworking into prose.
    • I have consolidated this section a little bit
  • The mention of Neverwhere is quite short - could it at least be expanded to explain the role the station played?
    • It's many, many years since I saw the series, but a perusal of online versions of the novel based on the series (probably not copyfree) indicate it is the entrance to a labyrinth. I have added a brief explanation of this. The places in the series are inspired by the real-life locations, but are rather different from them. --DavidCane (talk) 18:29, 6 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think the mention of Vauxhall Cross is a little off topic and there's no concrete tie-up between that fictional station and this one. Not sure if this should stay in the article.
    • I've taken it out. This has been around for some time and, as you say, its relationship is tangential to the article. --DavidCane (talk) 18:29, 6 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • The sentence on Shadow Man looks like trivia, especially as it cites a fan's YouTube video. I'd remove this.
    • I agree the citation is not strong and only part of the section of the game has any real resemblance to an underground station, but it does show the station was an inspiration in the game. There is a similar citation in the Aldwych tube station article for its usage in a Tomb Raider video game.--DavidCane (talk) 18:29, 6 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, it's unorthodox and I'm concerned what the exact copyright status is of a fan video of a modified video game but since it has been accepted for an FA I will assume good faith that it's acceptable. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 21:35, 6 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Summary[edit]

  • This is a concise but well-written article, and most of the issues I've raised above are relatively minor, so I'm happy to put the review on hold pending further changes. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 18:42, 4 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
No problem. Everything has been done so I can now pass this. Good to see another tube GA in the can. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 21:35, 6 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks again Ritchie. On the issue of the Shadowman video, I think it should be acceptable as it shows game play, which I don't see as being problematic copyright wise.--DavidCane (talk) 22:18, 6 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Down_Street_tube_station/GA1&oldid=636942370"