Jump to content

Talk:Parson Street railway station/GA1

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

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: Bob1960evens (talk · contribs) 08:20, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I will review. Bob1960evens (talk) 08:20, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I will make comments as I go. Please respond when items have been fixed against the individual comments, so that it is obvious what has been done and what still needs to be done.

Preliminaries
  • No dead links or redirected refs found.
  • No disambiguation links found.
  • All images are suitably licenced, and have appropriate captions.
Description
  • "It the second station along the line" should be "It is ..."  Done -mattbuck (Talk) 02:28, 11 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The station is surrounded on all sides by the A38 road, access between the platforms is via steps..." This needs a conjunction after the comma, or use of a semi-colon. However, it might be worth mentioning that the A38 is one-way at this point, and two sentences used.  Done -mattbuck (Talk) 02:28, 11 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • We already know the alignment of the platforms. It is probably worth mentioning that the branch heads northwards, to help the reader understand the layout of the station.  Done -mattbuck (Talk) 02:28, 11 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Services
History
Future
  • "in the hour 08:00-09:00" reads awkwardly. Suggest "in the morning peak between 8am and 9am" or somesuch.  Done, although I should comment the section is word-for-word the same as you thought was ok at Bedminster. Ditto below but without the done. - mattbuck (Talk) 09:23, 11 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • The ref is identical on the Bedminster article, and I missed it on that review.
Incidents
  • I think this could be turned into a single paragraph to aid the flow. The hook between the first and second paragraph is delays to service. This would move mention of theft towards the end of that section, which is the hook between the second and third paragraph. Have a go and see what you think.
The formal bit
GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
    See comments above
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:

Checking refs next. Bob1960evens (talk) 08:49, 11 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nearly there, I think. Bob1960evens (talk) 10:38, 11 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
All issues have now been addressed. Congratulations. I am awarding it GA status. Bob1960evens (talk) 14:50, 11 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]