Talk:Sloatsburg station
(Redirected from Talk:Sloatsburg (Metro-North station))
Latest comment: 15 years ago by Arsenikk in topic GA Review
Sloatsburg 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. | ||||||||||
|
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
GA Review
edit- This review is transcluded from Talk:Sloatsburg (Metro-North station)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
- GA review (see here for criteria)
- It is reasonably well written.
- a (prose): b (MoS):
- I found the history a bit confusing, since it was (in my eyes) not chronological, so I moved around the two last paragraphs. The two national parks mentioned in the lead should also be mentioned in the main body.
- a (prose): b (MoS):
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
- a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
- It is broad in its coverage.
- a (major aspects): b (focused):
- What I feel is lacking is a "services" or "operations" section (perhaps merged with another section). While this not need be long, it would mention the train services. According to this there are twelve daily (if I counted right) services in each direction. This sort of thing would be worth mentioning in the article, even if it slightly doubles up with the Port Jervis Line article. Also, travel times and distance to Port Jervis, Syracus Junction and New York would be common information readers might be looking for. I also presume you have checked that nothing notable happened between 1855 and 2005 (this could very be the case, but I am just checking to be sure).
- a (major aspects): b (focused):
- It follows the neutral point of view policy.
- Fair representation without bias:
- Fair representation without bias:
- It is stable.
- No edit wars etc.:
- No edit wars etc.:
- 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):
- a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
- Overall:
- Pass/Fail:
- Placing the article on hold until some more on services has been added. Otherwise the article will pass the GA critera. Good work so far. If you have any questions or comments, don't hesitate to speak up. Arsenikk (talk) 15:07, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
- Pass/Fail:
- All done!Mitch32(Go Syracuse) 23:16, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
- Great! Congratulations with a Good Article. Arsenikk (talk) 03:15, 10 January 2009 (UTC)