Talk:Old Street station/GA1
Latest comment: 6 years ago by DavidCane in topic GA Review
GA Review
edit| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs) 09:36, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
- I propose taking on this review and will read the article in detail shortly. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:36, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
- Did you know .... that the WMUK Offices used to be just around the corner from Old Street tube? They've moved since.... Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 09:46, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
First reading
edit- I will leave the lead for the time being and return to it later.
- "adjacent to a small shopping parade beneath" - Beneath what?
- Changed to "sub-surface"
- "... 45 chains (0.91 km) down-line" - Is it usual to use chains as a length of measurement on railway networks? And .91 km seems overly precise.
- This has been discussed to death (see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject UK Railways#Chains RFC) but in a nutshell, chains are still the official measurement for track in the UK. I've tweaked the convert to metres rounded to the nearest 100, which should be good enough for the layman reader Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 15:28, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
- The figure of 45 chains is sourceable:
- Padgett, David (October 2016) [1988]. Brailsford, Martyn (ed.). Railway Track Diagrams 2: Eastern (4th ed.). Frome: Trackmaps. map 14A. ISBN 978-0-9549866-8-1.
- "London North Eastern Route Sectional Appendix Module LN2" (PDF). Network Rail. 7 December 2013. p. 41.
- "MEB Moorgate Branch". Railway Codes. 7 July 2018.
- Since a chain is approximately 20 metres, a conversion to the nearest 10 m would not be overprecise: 45 chains (0.91 km). Note that the distance between the same two stations on the Northern line is less, at 0.69 km. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 09:09, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
- The figure of 45 chains is sourceable:
- This has been discussed to death (see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject UK Railways#Chains RFC) but in a nutshell, chains are still the official measurement for track in the UK. I've tweaked the convert to metres rounded to the nearest 100, which should be good enough for the layman reader Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 15:28, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
- "Several London Buses routes serve the station," - could you rephrase this to avoid the double plural.
- Done
- "Six people were taken to hospital for minor injuries." - Presumably the elevator stopped. Why was anybody injured?
- Clarified
- "acts as a final destination for people travelling with National Rail tickets marked "London Terminals"" - Are we talking here about travellers from say Welwyn Garden City? Why should it be their final destination?
- Yes, the basic idea behind stations in the London station group is that if you have a "London Terminals" ticket and get off a train at Old Street, you can't get on the tube or any other service without buying another ticket or using some other payment such as an Oyster Card or contactless.
- In the "Services" section, please state the direction of travel with reference to the "preceding" and "following" stations.
- I don't understand what you mean, sorry
- I was referring to the headings in the table in the Services section. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 17:58, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
- I don't think it's technically possible without changing Template:S-line, as the information in the boxes is baked into those templates. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 20:38, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
- It's actually in Template:S-rail (Template:S-line makes a row showing one station/route/station permutation), but the same column headers are used in several other templates such as Template:Rail start, Template:Heritage rail start, Template:Historical Rail Start, Template:Disused rail start all of which are used extensively. These column headers are not customisable in any of these templates, but even if we made Template:S-rail have customisable headings, I don't think that it would be useful to make this article inconsistent with several thousand articles for the UK alone, plus many more worldwide. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 09:31, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
- I don't think it's technically possible without changing Template:S-line, as the information in the boxes is baked into those templates. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 20:38, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
- I was referring to the headings in the table in the Services section. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 17:58, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
- I don't understand what you mean, sorry
- Are the platforms in the open air or are they underground?
- Everything's underground, hence the note in "Location" saying "It is in the centre of, and underneath the Old Street Roundabout"
- It would be perfectly possible to have an open air section in the middle of the roundabout, but clearly that is not the case here. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 17:58, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
- Everything's underground, hence the note in "Location" saying "It is in the centre of, and underneath the Old Street Roundabout"
- Looking at the lead now, I see "about 700 metres (0.43 mi)". It would be best go be consistent as to whether you give metric or imperial precedence.
- This fact isn't in the body, and I'm not sure why it's important - for a typical reader, knowing which travelcard zone it's in is more useful. I've removed it.
- "planned to become more important " - I would have thought "expected" would be better.
- Tweaked
- You could mention the footfall in the lead.
- I did a quick look round other articles, and none of Moorgate station, Angel tube station, Elephant & Castle tube station and Morden tube station have the footfall in the lead (and all are GAs of Northern Line stations). I'd rather keep things consistent.
- The lead is supposed to be a summary of the rest of the main body of text and I would have thought that that would have trumped consistency between articles. It's a very impressive statistic. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 17:58, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
- Okay; I've changed the lead to reflect this. In this specific case, Old Street is enjoying a significant renaissance as a stop, which the other stations aren't particularly. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 20:42, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
- The lead is supposed to be a summary of the rest of the main body of text and I would have thought that that would have trumped consistency between articles. It's a very impressive statistic. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 17:58, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
- I did a quick look round other articles, and none of Moorgate station, Angel tube station, Elephant & Castle tube station and Morden tube station have the footfall in the lead (and all are GAs of Northern Line stations). I'd rather keep things consistent.
- The infobox provides some impressive statistics for increased footfall which seems to have tripled between 2014 and 2016. Are these figures just National Rail, or do they include the underground users?
- I haven't a clue - Redrose64 would probably be able to give you an answer. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 15:28, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
- DavidCane (talk · contribs) is more your man for this one. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 09:09, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
- Something doesn't look right - the infobox gives a 2016 entry/exit figure as 5.324 million, yet the Evening Standard source claims 23 million people visit the station every year. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 09:20, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
- The Evening Standard figure (which merely says "Every year 23 million people pass through the station, and it is open for 20 hours a day.") probably includes interchanges and also London Underground. The 2016-17 figure in the infobox is entries and exits only, excluding interchange, but I don't know whether this figure is for National Rail alone or if it also includes London Underground. However, this press release from November 2015 may help to explain the increase. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 09:52, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
- The usage statistics that were shown are only those for national rail. There are separate statistics for the Underground. The Underground statistics (and those for the DLR, where relevant) are included in the infobox automatically from a set of templates embedded in the infobox that are activated only if the station is a tube or DLR station. There are switches for this in the infobox code which are triggered if one of the
symbol1,symbol2,sybmbol3, etc. parameters is set to "underground" or "DLR". The National rail statistic have to be input manually. I've added the symbol parameters, so the icons appear in the top of the infobox next to the name and the tube stats appear.--DavidCane (talk) 18:22, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
- The usage statistics that were shown are only those for national rail. There are separate statistics for the Underground. The Underground statistics (and those for the DLR, where relevant) are included in the infobox automatically from a set of templates embedded in the infobox that are activated only if the station is a tube or DLR station. There are switches for this in the infobox code which are triggered if one of the
- The Evening Standard figure (which merely says "Every year 23 million people pass through the station, and it is open for 20 hours a day.") probably includes interchanges and also London Underground. The 2016-17 figure in the infobox is entries and exits only, excluding interchange, but I don't know whether this figure is for National Rail alone or if it also includes London Underground. However, this press release from November 2015 may help to explain the increase. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 09:52, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
- Something doesn't look right - the infobox gives a 2016 entry/exit figure as 5.324 million, yet the Evening Standard source claims 23 million people visit the station every year. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 09:20, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
- DavidCane (talk · contribs) is more your man for this one. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 09:09, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
- That's all for now. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 13:42, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
- I haven't a clue - Redrose64 would probably be able to give you an answer. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 15:28, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
- Okay, I've given some replies above; most things addressed, a few things need further discussion. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 15:28, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
- I am satisfied with your answers and actions, so am passing this. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:24, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
- Okay, I've given some replies above; most things addressed, a few things need further discussion. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 15:28, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
GA criteria
edit- The article is well written and complies with MOS guidelines on prose and grammar, structure and layout.
- The article uses many reliable third-party sources, and makes frequent citations to them. I do not believe it contains original research.
- The article covers the main aspects of the subject and remains focussed.
- The article is neutral.
- The article is stable.
- The images are relevant and have suitable captions, and are either in the public domain or suitably licensed.
- Final assessment - I believe this article reaches the GA criteria. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:24, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks, Cwmhiraeth, hopefully we'll sort out what the footfall figures mean in due course. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:41, 21 September 2018 (UTC)