Talk:Haw Par Villa MRT station/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Dora the Axe-plorer (talk · contribs) 06:27, 24 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall:
Pass/Fail:

Just wondering, if the names Mass Rapid Transit, Circle line and Jurong Region line were abbreviated as MRT, CCL and JRL in the lead, respectively, do they need to be repeated inside the body in full and have the abbreviations again? Dora the Axe-plorer (explore) 07:57, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think so, given I've received plenty of similar feedback before. You can check other GA articles like Bright Hill MRT station or Mayflower MRT station ZKang123 (talk) 07:20, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Right, that's not a problem then. Overall a well-written article, properly cited and verifiable; I'll be passing the nomination. I was at Haw Par Villa yesterday so this review had me looking for the Art-in-Transit work at the station. Never knew this was also a CD Shelter. Interesting. Dora the Axe-plorer (explore) 13:53, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]