Talk:Darling railway station
Darling railway station was nominated as a Engineering and technology good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (March 12, 2023, reviewed version). There are suggestions on the review page for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated. |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
External links modified
[edit]Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Darling railway station. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140402040335/http://ptv.vic.gov.au/route/view/905 to http://ptv.vic.gov.au/route/view/905
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:57, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
Good Article nomination
[edit]Recently, I have been working on this article to improve it to Good Article status. To achieve this status, I have followed this guide. Upon completion, I have nominated this article for Good Article status on 28/12/2022. HoHo3143 (talk) 09:09, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
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 |
- This review is transcluded from Talk:Darling railway station/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Sammi Brie (talk · contribs) 04:14, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
This is a quickfail. The concern is that your sourcing is not of sufficient quality to pass criterion 2a. It is fairly dependent on transit blogs and primary sources with two flagrantly bad sources: the itinerary site Rome2rio and TripAdvisor, along with some other user-generated and social media sites. The article needs more secondary sourcing (newspapers, magazines, etc.) before it can reasonably pass that GA criterion. I see you have several additional station pages at GA, and a look at them shows the same issues plus some others—notably bare URLs—permeates the set. Please upgrade the quality and quantity of your sources before nominating these pages again.
- Former good article nominees
- C-Class Australia articles
- Low-importance Australia articles
- C-Class Melbourne articles
- Low-importance Melbourne articles
- WikiProject Melbourne articles
- C-Class Australian Transport articles
- Low-importance Australian Transport articles
- WikiProject Australian Transport articles
- WikiProject Australia articles
- C-Class rail transport articles
- Low-importance rail transport articles
- C-Class Stations articles
- WikiProject Stations articles
- All WikiProject Trains pages