Talk:Kent station (Sound Transit)/GA1

Latest comment: 5 years ago by Argento Surfer in topic GA Review

GA Review edit

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


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

Reviewer: Argento Surfer (talk · contribs) 17:42, 21 June 2018 (UTC)Reply


GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria


All of my discussions are open to discussion. Once complete, I will claim this review for points in the 2018 wikicup. Argento Surfer (talk) 17:42, 21 June 2018 (UTC)Reply
  1. Is it well written?
    A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:  
    These are my edits for minor issues.
    "A larger depot was built in 1893 out of bricks" - linking to Brickwork seems unnecessary. And is this different from what the first depot was made from?
    B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:  
    no concern
  2. Is it verifiable with no original research?
    A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:  
    no concern
    B. All in-line citations are from reliable sources, including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines:  
    no concern
    C. It contains no original research:  
    no concern
    D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:  
    no concern - AGF for the non-web sources
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:  
    nothing obvious has been omitted
    B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):  
    no concern
  4. Is it neutral?
    It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:  
    no concern
  5. Is it stable?
    It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:  
    no concern
  6. Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
    A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:  
    no concern
    B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:  
    Is the historic NPR depot the 1889 station or the 1893 station?
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:  
    Two minor things that I'm not comfortable addressing myself. Otherwise, this one's good to pass. Argento Surfer (talk) 18:17, 21 June 2018 (UTC)Reply
    @Argento Surfer: Thanks for the review. The 1893 depot is the one that survives, and I've tried to make it clearer in the prose. Also un-linked the bricks, but I think it's important to note since the first depot was just a wood building, like most of the other early stations for these towns. SounderBruce 22:52, 21 June 2018 (UTC)Reply
    Thanks for the quick response. The changes all look good and this one's ready to promote. Argento Surfer (talk) 12:10, 22 June 2018 (UTC)Reply
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.