Talk:Sloatsburg station/GA1

GA Review

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

GA review (see here for criteria)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): b (MoS):
I found the history a bit confusing, since it was (in my eyes) not chronological, so I moved around the two last paragraphs. The two national parks mentioned in the lead should also be mentioned in the main body.
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
What I feel is lacking is a "services" or "operations" section (perhaps merged with another section). While this not need be long, it would mention the train services. According to this there are twelve daily (if I counted right) services in each direction. This sort of thing would be worth mentioning in the article, even if it slightly doubles up with the Port Jervis Line article. Also, travel times and distance to Port Jervis, Syracus Junction and New York would be common information readers might be looking for. I also presume you have checked that nothing notable happened between 1855 and 2005 (this could very be the case, but I am just checking to be sure).
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
No edit wars etc.:
It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall:
Pass/Fail:
Placing the article on hold until some more on services has been added. Otherwise the article will pass the GA critera. Good work so far. If you have any questions or comments, don't hesitate to speak up. Arsenikk ^(talk) 15:07, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

All done!Mitch32^{(Go Syracuse)} 23:16, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Great! Congratulations with a Good Article. Arsenikk ^(talk) 03:15, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]