Talk:Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority/GA1
Appearance
GA Review
[edit]GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Retrolord (talk · contribs) 09:18, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
Happy to review this. ★★RetroLord★★ 09:18, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
Review
[edit]Nevermind, another quickfail. Please atleast read the criteria before nominating next time. I'm getting sick of these. Incase your wondering, there are about 200 [citation needed] tags in the article. Fix it. ★★KING RETROLORD★★ 11:05, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
- Not the nom here, but I've been slowing working through improving the MBTA articles and I figure the main article should get a bump. Aside from the cns (and converting that ugly chart to a native graph), what else is needed to push the article towards GA? Pi.1415926535 (talk) 14:20, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Toolbox |
---|
Here's a list I have for GA artricle prep:
Things to do:
- Fix all problems indicated by template boxes, inline tags, & on the Talk page.
- Fix any problems revealed by running the GA & FA tools.
- Look at WP:Start-Class & WP:C-Class. Fix those gaps.
- Make sure it meets all of the WP:BCLASS criteria. An article should be at B-class, before asking for a GA Review. Template:B-class review is an overview.
- Consider adding an Infobox.
- Fix the formatting, so it works well on very wide & very narrow windows.
- Look at the Mobile view of the article, & resolve any issues it uncovers.
- Convert all the citations to a consistent citation style. Either the {{Cite or {{sfn templates.
- Verify all citations. Fix dead links. Fill in all useful fields on the citation templates. E.g quote, ISBN & ISSN.
- To prevent future link rot, Archive each citation, & add the parameters
|archiveurl= |archivedate= |deadurl=yes & usually !quote= to each citation template. - Add more citations.
- Finally, work through both the WP:Good_articles & WP:Featured_articles, as well as their sub-articles, & fix shortcomings. That is, try doing the review yourself, & resolve the shortcomings.
— Lentower (talk) 00:45, 9 May 2015 (UTC)