Talk:Sturtevant station

Sturtevant 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.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
January 17, 2010	Good article nominee	Listed

Trains: Stations Low‑importance

	Trains Portal
Sel	week 31, 2010

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.

Wisconsin Low‑importance

	Wisconsin portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Wisconsin, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Wisconsin on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.WisconsinWikipedia:WikiProject WisconsinTemplate:WikiProject WisconsinWisconsin articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

GA Review

Latest comment: 14 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion

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

Reviewer: Arsenikk ^(talk) 00:34, 17 January 2010 (UTC)Reply

Concerning ref 2, would it not be better to update to the 2009 figures. Also, since the passenger figures are references, they don't need to be external links.
- Updated for 2009, but I did leave the the template in the external links for the ridership figures. This is the case as they are attached to the template for Amtrak stations that are used for all Amtrak station articles.
Stating that there is paid parking and that this can be done by day or monthly pass is fine, but the exact dollar values will tend to change, and I tend to figure that this sort of information is best left out.
- Good call. References to costs have been removed.
The hyphens in the refs need to be changed to endashes, 'cus they're punctuation. See WP:DASH. (not stricly a GA criteria, but since there isn't anything else to pick on...)
- Endashes added.
Perhaps mention in the lead that the station is on CPR-owned track.
- Added.

I am placing the article on hold. Not much to fix up really, and the article will pass. Arsenikk ^(talk) 00:34, 17 January 2010 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for reviewing this! Let me know if anything else needs to be taken care of.Patriarca12 (talk) 01:31, 17 January 2010 (UTC)Reply
- Nice work! Congratulations with a good article :) Arsenikk ^(talk) 13:02, 17 January 2010 (UTC)Reply

Add topic