Jump to content

Talk:Yellow Line (Washington Metro)/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing

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

Reviewer: --PCB 20:23, 26 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for criteria)

Footnote 8 is a dead link.

  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
    The prose issues are listed below.
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
    There are a couple of reference problems listed below.
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
    Rename the extension section to "Future." I think that would make more sense.
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  6. 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):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:
    I will put the article on hold for the prose and reference issues.
Lead and Infobox
  • The list of stations in non-peak hours is too detailed and should be removed.
  • Can you explain the 18-month trial program (and perhaps mention it outside the lead)?
  • The last sentence should be moved to the Route section, or else it should be referenced elsewhere.
  • Can you use other words other than "peak"? - official WMATA term, now defined in notes.
  • The date and length need to be referenced in the infobox.
History
  • The first paragraph is well-written, however, it is almost an exact copy of other articles. I think it should be rephrased.
  • When was the original route planned? You never said. - I think it says 1967, which is much later than the rest of the system.
  • Almost the entire history outside the first sentence is unreferenced.
  • WMATA needs to be spelled out somewhere like this: Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (WMATA)
Extension to Fort Totten
  • Need more than one reference for the paragraph.
  • Find a better word for "off-peak", it is used very often.
Route
  • I believe Kings Highway needs an apostrophe. - All of my sources show no apostrophe.
  • Much of it is unreferenced. The paragraph needs more inline citations within the paragraph, not just after it.
  • There is a MOSBOLD violation: the bold words should not be bold, they do not redirect here.
List of stations
  • Again, find another word for peak.
  • I believe the headings like "Stations served during all operating hours" needs to be a third-level heading.
  • Move the paragraph about the trains to the Route section.
References
  • Footnote 1 needs an accessdate.
  • Dates are inconsistent.
  • You need an author for Footnote 13 and 14.
  • Spell out WMATA.
    Yes, it needs to be spelled out every time even though it is defined in the body. --PCB 21:53, 26 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Good job. Pass. — PCB 15:02, 6 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]