Talk:Bowdoin station/GA1
GA Review
[edit]The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: ArnabSaha (talk · contribs) 16:18, 3 October 2020 (UTC)
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:
- A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
- 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:
- A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:
- 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):
- A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
- Is it neutral?
- It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
- 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:
- 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:
- A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
- Overall:
- Pass or Fail: Good to go.
- Pass or Fail:
Comments
[edit]- Citation no. [29], [45] is in capital. Change them to sentence case (MOS:ALLCAPS).
Done
- "In 1991, the state agreed to built the project by 2011" --> build
- Done
- "MBTA Commuter Rail service to Providence and Concord and on the Woburn Branch were cut entirely" --> either "service" and "was" or "services" and "were".
- Done
- Also add this in the infobox
| disabled = No- Done
❯❯❯ S A H A 17:02, 3 October 2020 (UTC)
- Done all so far. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 01:53, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.