Talk:Crystal Palace railway station/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Hchc2009 (talk · contribs) 17:18, 14 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

At the moment the article doesn't meet the GA standards - in particular, as per below, it needs a fair bit of work on the references. Happy to review at a later stage when this is done. Hchc2009 (talk) 17:18, 14 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well-written:

(a) the prose is clear and concise, respects copyright laws, and the spelling and grammar are correct;

"From the outset..." - when? The main body of the article hasn't described its construction etc. yet.
There are quite a few "bitty" paragraphs, with one or two sentences. It would be worth seeing if these could be combined into more flowing structures.
Inconsistency in "platform" capitalisation (sometimes "Platform x", sometimes "platform x")

(b) it complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.

"through the same treacherous material [clay], through the hill on which the Crystal Palace stands, and immediately under one of the great water towers, a superincumbent weight of 2,200 tons which taxed in its execution all the skill and workmanship of the eminent contractors." - this shouldn't be in italics according to the MOS.
Transport links and services - these sections need to be dated (e.g. "As of 2013...") as they are likely to change over time.
"London Buses route 157, 249, 358, 410, 432 and night route N3." - this sentence lacks a verb.
" built to serve the site of the 1851 exhibition building" - why the italics?
"The frontage of the station was rebuilt in 1875, and was described: " - described by who?

Factually accurate and verifiable:

(a) it provides references to all sources of information in the section(s) dedicated to the attribution of these sources according to the guide to layout;

"Railways of the Southern Region (PSL Field Guide, Geoffrey Body, 1984))" - lacks a page number
"Crystal Palace Train station restored - This is Croydon 28 September 2012" - lacks a retrieval date.
"Please note: Some methodology may vary year on year." - this doesn't quite read as regular English - perhaps "the method for calculating the figures is not consistent"?
- The third of these is not actually in the article. It's generated by {{Citation ORR rail usage data}}, used within {{Infobox London station}}, and so is identical to the corresponding ref found in Herne Hill railway station, which passed FAC with that exact wording. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:15, 14 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

(b) it provides in-line citations from reliable sources 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.

Large parts of the article are unsourced, including a range of statements that meet the threshold for in-line citations (e.g. "Following the fire in 1936 which destroyed the Crystal Palace passenger numbers fell ", "The original station was partially refurbished in 2002 by Railtrack at a cost of £4 million. ", " Electric trains from Victoria were advertised to complete the journey in fifteen minutes - a running time that has never been equalled.", etc.)

(c) it contains no original research.

As much of the article is unsourced, this is hard to ascertain.

Broad in its coverage:

(a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic;

What was in the area when the railway station was first built? e.g. was it suburbs, a green field site, etc.?
What is the difference between the high and low level sites?
The article probably needs to mention the changing ownership of the station over time.

(b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).

Focused.

Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without bias, giving due weight to each.

Appears neutral.

Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.

Stable.

Illustrated, if possible, by images:

(a) images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content;

File:Croydon, Norwood & Woodside RJD 53.jpg claims author + 70 years as its justification for PD, but gives no details of the author or their date of death.
- This diagram was published by the Railway Clearing House (RCH) as one of a series of over 150 which were periodically revised, and this particular one was issued in 1908. The "author" is unknown, but will have been an RCH staff member, possibly a professional draughtsman or cartographer employed by the RCH. Copyright will have been assigned to the organisation, not to an individual. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:15, 14 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

(b) images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.

Yes.