Talk:Darling railway station

Darling railway station was nominated as a Engineering and technology good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (March 12, 2023, reviewed version). There are suggestions on the review page for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated.

Australia: Melbourne / Transport Low‑importance

	Australia portal Darling railway station is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Melbourne (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject Australian Transport (assessed as Low-importance).
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What's this?} at the National Library of Australia.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

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.

External links modified

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Darling railway station. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140402040335/http://ptv.vic.gov.au/route/view/905 to http://ptv.vic.gov.au/route/view/905

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:57, 4 September 2017 (UTC)Reply

Good Article nomination

Latest comment: 1 year ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Recently, I have been working on this article to improve it to Good Article status. To achieve this status, I have followed this guide. Upon completion, I have nominated this article for Good Article status on 28/12/2022. HoHo3143 (talk) 09:09, 29 December 2022 (UTC)Reply

GA Review

Latest comment: 1 year ago2 comments1 person in discussion

Unsuccessful. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 04:15, 12 March 2023 (UTC)Reply

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.

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

Reviewer: Sammi Brie (talk · contribs) 04:14, 12 March 2023 (UTC)Reply

This is a quickfail. The concern is that your sourcing is not of sufficient quality to pass criterion 2a. It is fairly dependent on transit blogs and primary sources with two flagrantly bad sources: the itinerary site Rome2rio and TripAdvisor, along with some other user-generated and social media sites. The article needs more secondary sourcing (newspapers, magazines, etc.) before it can reasonably pass that GA criterion. I see you have several additional station pages at GA, and a look at them shows the same issues plus some others—notably bare URLs—permeates the set. Please upgrade the quality and quantity of your sources before nominating these pages again.

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.

Add topic