Talk:Sumner station

Sumner station has been listed as one of the Engineering and technology good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review: May 13, 2018. (Reviewed version).

A fact from Sumner station appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 8 May 2018, and was viewed approximately 5,229 times (disclaimer) (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that Sumner station (pictured) was designed to resemble hop kilns, referencing the city's historical agriculture industry?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2018/May. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Sumner station.

Wikipedia

Trains: Stations 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.

United States: Washington / Seattle Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Washington (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject Washington - Seattle (assessed as Low-importance).

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Sumner station/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Freikorp (talk · contribs) 12:20, 13 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Is it reasonably well written?
Narrow and Traffic streets? So just clarifying, those are the names of the streets? That's weird but okeydokey. Out of curiosity is Narrow street particularly narrow? :)
Yes, they are the real names and quite accurate.

Why does the redlink 'Red Apple' pipe to ' Red Apple Markets'? Should you remove the piping if that's the actual name of the chain of stores?
Removed the red link, but I plan to put the article at "Red Apple Markets" eventually. The company is commonly referred to as "Red Apple", but that title is taken by other articles.

"two bicycle racks" - can you give any indication of how many spaces for bikes there are on the rack? I only ask as you're very specific with parking spaces, and this detail consequently highlights the lack of detail regarding the racks
Added capacities for the bike racks and lockers.

"awarded to Lumpkin General Contractor" - you previously mention a firm was based in Tacoma. Can you let us know where this contractor is based or something relevant about them?
Couldn't find any information on the contractor.

"were moved to a new facilities" - grammar
Fixed.

"on city-owned" - I'm a little confused by this. Is this the equivalent of saying "land owned by the city"
Added missing word.

"adjacent to the station in downtown" - should the word "in" be here? I'm honestly not sure.
Removed "in downtown".
Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
A. Has an appropriate reference section:

B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:

C. No original research:
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 if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
Overall:
Pass or Fail: Looks really good. Placing on hold until minor issues are addressed. Freikorp (talk) 12:52, 13 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Freikorp: I've addressed your points above. Thanks for the review. Sounder Bruce 20:24, 13 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Passing. :) Freikorp (talk) 23:13, 13 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]