Talk:Fort Canning MRT station

Fort Canning MRT station has been listed as one of the Engineering and technology good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review: March 24, 2021. (Reviewed version).

Trains: Stations / Rapid transit Low‑importance

Trains Portal

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Trains, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to rail transport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. See also: WikiProject Trains to do list and the Trains Portal.TrainsWikipedia:WikiProject TrainsTemplate:WikiProject Trainsrail transport articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated projects or task forces:
/
	This article is supported by WikiProject Stations.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Rapid transit.

Singapore Low‑importance

	Singapore portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Singapore, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Singapore on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SingaporeWikipedia:WikiProject SingaporeTemplate:WikiProject SingaporeSingapore articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Move discussion in progress[edit]

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Aljunied MRT Station which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 09:32, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Fort Canning MRT station/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: ArnabSaha (talk · contribs) 12:03, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

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:
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:
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):
Is it neutral?
It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
Is it stable?
It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
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:
Overall:
Pass or Fail:

Comments[edit]

The citations need to be edited. Like citation [21] - "LTA | News Room | News Releases | Factsheet: Downtown Line 3 to Open on 21 October 2017". Just write "Factsheet: Downtown Line 3 to Open on 21 October 2017".
The Singapore MRT articles I reviewed, they have "Art-in-Transit programme" mentioned. Maybe make a article on this and wikilink them to the station articles. It seems notable for an article.
Any image of the artwork?
"developments around the station includes Clarke Quay" - Include
"Clarke Quay, Liang Court, Robertson Quay, UE Shopping Mall and Fort Canning Park, in addition to religious sites such as the Church of Sacred Heart and Sri Thendayupathani Temple." - Any wikilinks for these?
The coordinate seems incorrect on GMaps.
"The debris along the tunnels’ route were removed" - was.
"stations and tunnels started on that month" - ommit "on"
Remove "www" from website names in citation.
- Fixed Changed all www.lta.gov.sg to Land Transport Authority
Any more details regarding the opening?
- As far as I know, there are no further significant news regarding the station.
"River Valley MRT station in August 2010" - Month/Year not mentioned in body.
- Done Added mention
Some wikilinks are missing like Chinatown station.
- Done
Author not mentioned in citation [13]. Check the other ones too.
- Done
Add citations for the platform level and disabld access in Infobox.
- Done

 Saha ❯❯❯ Stay safe  12:56, 24 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Addressed the issues above. Some of the locations stated in the article has already been linked in the lead, such as Liang Court and Clarke Quay. Also fixed the coordinates. I am currently working on the artwork page at the moment under Art and Architecture on the MRT network.--ZKang123 (talk) 08:31, 22 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

add redlink for the Art and Architecture article. Saha ❯❯❯ Stay safe 08:39, 22 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@ZKang123: you can put wikilinks twice in lead and in the body. Link the first "Bencoolen station", "Land Transport Authority" in body. Saha ❯❯❯ Stay safe 16:12, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

also mark the things as

Done Saha ❯❯❯ Stay safe 16:27, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Good to go Saha ❯❯❯ Stay safe 13:50, 24 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]