Jump to content

Talk:Incheon Station

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Former good article nomineeIncheon Station was a Engineering and technology good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
November 16, 2007Articles for deletionKept
March 5, 2024Good article nomineeNot listed
Did You Know
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on September 6, 2023.
The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that the rights to build Incheon Station in the Korean Empire were temporarily given to an American company in an attempt to protect it from the Empire of Japan?
Current status: Former good article nominee


Source

[edit]

The Japanese version of this page has info. regarding the expansion. [[1]] JPBarrass 11:23, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Incheon 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:

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) 02:50, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Did you know nomination

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Cielquiparle (talk) 02:33, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(
)
Incheon Station in 1908
Incheon Station in 1908
  • ... that the rights to build Incheon Station (pictured) in the Korean Empire were temporarily given to an American company in an attempt to protect it from the Empire of Japan? Source: "In an effort to protect the right to construct the Gyeongin Railway against the Japanese, the Joseon government granted the station to an American named J.R. Morse in 1896 before the station was officially opened, on condition that the government would retrieve it 15 years later." The Korea Herald - regarding the phrasing of "company", see "An American company had won the concession from the Korean government to construct the Seoul–Incheon rail line" page 118 of A History of Korea (Kyung Moon Hwang, 3rd ed.)
    • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Arleigh Burke-class destroyer
    • Comment: The DYKcheck tool is counting an erroneous ~300 extra characters of prose in the current article and in its history for some reason (I suspect one of the templates is causing this). Per the prose size count of Page size tool, it has been fivefold expanded.

5x expanded by Freedom4U (talk). Self-nominated at 18:21, 11 July 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Incheon Station; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.[reply]

  • Expanded, nicely written, hook interesting and verified through the electronic article that constitutes one of the sources for that statement; image properly licensed; no plagiarism detected. Good to go. Dahn (talk) 19:19, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. It's unfortunate that that image isn't clearer as a thumbnail. Cielquiparle (talk) 02:29, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

[edit]
Unsuccessful. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 01:14, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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:Incheon Station/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Trainsandotherthings (talk · contribs) 13:50, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Hi there, I anticipate completing this review by the end of the holiday weekend, likely sooner. From a first glance the article appears close to meeting the GA criteria. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 13:50, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  1. 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:
  2. 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:
    Formatting of references and notes is good. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 13:50, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    B. Reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose):
    I am satisfied both with the reliability of the sources, including newspapers, government sources, and a book covering Korea's history, and with the extent of inline citations within the article. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 15:00, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    C. It contains no original research:
    I am satisfied no original research is present based on my checks of several references and comparing them to the material cited to them in the article. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 15:00, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
    No concerns based on a basic copyvio check and directly consulting a few of the sources. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 15:00, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  3. 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):
    No issues with going off-topic or excessive detail, my concerns are actually that the article needs some expansion per my comments below the checklist. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 18:41, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Is it neutral?
    It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
    Article maintains an appropriate neutral tone and fairly represents the sourcing. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 18:41, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Is it stable?
    It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
    Article history is sufficiently stable. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 13:50, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
    A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:
    All images are either public domain (historical photos from the early days of the station) or are properly licensed with Creative Commons licensing and uploaded by a number of Commons contributors. No fair use media is present. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 18:41, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
    All images are directly relevant to the station and of good quality. The images in the 1908 presentation are missing alt text, the other images are good. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 13:50, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:

Comments

[edit]
  • I suggest combining the short sentence The Suin Line was discontinued in 1995 with the following sentence.
  • You have the original Suin Line linked, but not the rebuilt version that operates presently and has its own article.

I have placed the article on hold pending response to my comments. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 17:45, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the lack of response for a few days, I've been away for Christmas and New Year's (and a bit inebriated). I'll try to address everything by end of the day UK time. Cheers! ~ F4U (talk • they/it) 20:25, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Don't feel rushed, I've caught a case of Covid myself so I don't have much to do other than Wikipedia. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 21:58, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Incheon_Station&oldid=1211888603"