Talk:190th Street station/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Mgasparin (talk · contribs) 08:16, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

1a. Is this article fairly well written? The prose is "clear and concise", without spelling and grammar errors:

The article is quite detailed concerning history and construction, which is good.

1b. "clear and concise", without spelling and grammar errors:

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

2a. Has an appropriate reference section:

2b. Cites reliable sources, where necessary:

2c. No original research:

All claims and facts are backed up with references and no original research appears to be present.

2d. No copyright violations nor plagiarism:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

3a. Major aspects:

3b. Focused (see summary style):

This article gives the reader a very balanced mix of generality and detail such that it would be useful to anyone.

4. Is it neutral?

4a. Fair representation without bias:

5. Is it stable? No edit wars, etc:

6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

6a. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:

6b. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:

~~Plenty of pictures, perhaps even too many. I would consider removing some images from the article, although this is not mandatory.~~

Pass or Fail:

Overall, this article is very well written and is very informative about the history, layout, constuction, etc., of this NYC subway station. It provides numerous images and cites all sources of factual information. I pass this article on these grounds.Mgasparin (talk) 08:16, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Responding to request at GAN talk page. Read through the article and am not having any issue with it being passed as a Good Article. Checked all the images and a few references and they are fine. Not concerned about the zip code discussion on the talk page as it is not part of the GA criteria. Only suggestions would be to get rid of the gallery heading as the images are all entrances so they fit nicely in the above section. Also 2020 repairs do not really fit in history. It does seem a bit short, but I can't think of much else that can really be added. Sometimes an article is just good. AIRcorn (talk) 18:45, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks for looking over this. I have removed the heading. I just wanted to be sure. Thanks.--Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 19:47, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]