Talk:Kipling station

Kipling station was nominated as a Engineering and technology good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (August 20, 2012). There are suggestions on the review page for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated.

Trains: Stations / Rapid transit Low‑importance

Trains Portal

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Trains, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to rail transport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. See also: WikiProject Trains to do list and the Trains Portal.TrainsWikipedia:WikiProject TrainsTemplate:WikiProject Trainsrail transport articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated projects or task forces:
/
	This article is supported by WikiProject Stations.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Rapid transit.

Canada: Ontario / Toronto Low‑importance

	Canada portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Ontario portal This article is supported by WikiProject Ontario.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Toronto (assessed as Low-importance).

Text and/or other creative content from this version of Kipling station was copied or moved into Kipling Bus Terminal with this edit on 2024-04-11. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists.

Article reorganization

This article has been edited to conform with a standard scheme for subsections proposed here: Talk:Toronto_subway_and_RT#Individual_Station_articles_-_a_standard_scheme_for_subsections -A.Roz (talk) 04:54, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Kipling (TTC)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Dom497 (talk · contribs) 00:20, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose quality:

B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
A. References to sources:
~~See comment section below.~~ Issues with references not fixed within 7 days. See last comment in comment section for more info.

B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
~~See comment section below.~~ Good.

C. No original research:
~~See comment section below.~~ Good.
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. Major aspects:

B. Focused:
Is it neutral?
Fair representation without bias:
Is it stable?
No edit wars, etc:
Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:

B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
Overall:
Pass or Fail:
~~The article will be on hold for 7 days to allow the issues below to be addressed.--Dom497 (talk) 22:54, 13 August 2012 (UTC)~~ See last comment below for reason of failing the article.--Dom497 (talk) 21:18, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

"Currently it serves the high density residential and commercial developments that are being built, while acting as a hub for commuter travel", needs a ref.

"East of the station towards Islington, the line continues on the surface alongside the railway right-of-way which paralleling Dundas Street at a distance. After crossing over Bloor Street to the north side, it takes the alignment parallel to Bloor as the line goes underground", needs a ref.

The "Service" section of the article needs refs.
- Done - Secondarywaltz (talk) 18:58, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - Not quite done yet. Some of the refs are missing the publisher, access date/retrieved date, and date (if applicable).--Dom497 (talk) 13:28, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    - I added a reference to the "Service" section which is what this paragraph refers to. Anything else noted above, I am leaving to you and the nominator, who seems totally disinterested. That's too bad. The focus of what I do is not based on any need to be judged or rated. Thanks for what you have done here anyway. Secondarywaltz (talk) 18:54, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      - Its been 7 days and I am failing the article for the following reason: Issues with the references have not been fixed and are not actively being worked on (it is not my job to fix this issue). Once the refs are fixed, re-nominated this article and let me know on my talk page. I will be glad to review this article again once the issue is fixed.--Dom497 (talk) 21:18, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]