Talk:Finchley Central tube station/GA2

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Ritchie333 (talk · contribs) 12:11, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

I'll take this one. As it went through the wringer a bit on the first GA review, and a lot of work appears to have been done since, this should be a fairly straightforward review.

Specific comments will follow. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 12:11, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

Lead

• Is it worth saying how far the station is from the centre of London? (As High Barnet tube station does, for example).
  • No problem. I've used template:great circle distance to calculate this automatically.--DavidCane (talk) 23:29, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

Layout

• As stated in the previous GA review, I prefer "The station today" and "Services and connections" to appear first. It's something I've always done; give the basic facts that can be seen on the ground first, then going into the history for the more interested readers. I think all the London Transport GAs I've written have followed this format, and it seems to work well.
  • My GAs always go history first, followed by "station today" or similar, which I think has the benefit of being chronological. This is the order used for the GAs for two stations to the south - East Finchley and Highgate--DavidCane (talk) 23:29, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

Okay, well I think this is a stylistic choice and not really part of the GA criteria in any case. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 10:06, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

I also prefer station today and services before history, I think it makes sense to have the current situation at the start and then past/future for those interested. Having station today first allows you to add context to the history - you can either have "X is where Y is now" or "X was built" and later "Y was built on the site of X". The latter of these requires you to adjust your mental picture of X after you've already built that picture, which is harder than putting that mental picture right at the start. -mattbuck (Talk) 10:35, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

History

• "Before the line was opened it was purchased in July 1867..." - but presumably after construction had started?
  • Yes, clarified.--DavidCane (talk) 23:29, 14 April 2018 (UTC)
• "Alexandra Palace" could do with a link
  • Done.--DavidCane (talk) 23:29, 14 April 2018 (UTC)
• I think it would be helpful to clarify where exactly the Northern line ran at the time of the Northern Heights plan
  • Done.--DavidCane (talk) 23:29, 14 April 2018 (UTC)
• "had the greatest call on LPTB funds" - is "call" the right word to use here?
  • changed to "demand for".--DavidCane (talk) 23:29, 14 April 2018 (UTC)
• The placement of the 1946 map is awkward and causes the next main section to be indented. I think the map is useful, I'm not sure where we can easily put it.
  • The image does not work anywhere else and putting it on the right means it gets shoved down by the infobox, so I've added {{clear left}} to force the start of the next section to be un-indented. Depending on the width of the browser window, this may leave a bit of white space.--DavidCane (talk) 23:29, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

The station today

• The platform layout doesn't have a source (though this should be trivial to find on TfL's website).
  • The TfL website does not provide a station layout plan like the national rail site does. The external link at the bottom of the infobox goes straight to the TfL page for the station to show what it does provide which includes the directions served by each platform. I have used a link to the same page as a ref for the directions served. The photograph shows the platforms.--DavidCane (talk) 23:29, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

To be honest, this is not exactly a claim that is going to be "challenged or likely to be challenged" and can be verified simply by travelling to the station and having a look! Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 10:06, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

That would technically be original research, but it's probably the acceptable sort. Could always cite a photo or something if you really needed.

Have to say, TfL don't do public station maps? That seems surprising. I guess it's a lot trickier for the central underground warrens than NR have with their one-level-with-a-footbridge standard. But I'll bring it up on TfL Yammer as a potential thing which might be useful for the public. -mattbuck (Talk) 10:37, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

There are certainly publicly-available station plans. For example, see this article which complains about how using the official route from the Victoria line to High Speed 1 at Kings Cross St Pancras tube station takes forever, and explains why with a detailed map. I don't know if this is just reserved for complex interchanges, whereas Finchley Central is about as a simple an interchange as you can get. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 12:59, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

That seems to be about the signposted route, I don't see anything which claims that that's an official TfL map of the station (kudos to Oxyman for getting their photo used). I'll see what Yammer brings back, there's a lot of people in the business who can answer me. -mattbuck (Talk) 13:25, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

Services and connections

• Is it worth clarifying that at off-peak times, you have to change here to reach Mill Hill East as there are no direct trains?
  • Done. some trains after 11.00 pm also run through to Mill Hill East.--DavidCane (talk) 23:29, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

Summary

As expected, there are only a few issues with this article - it is well written and sourced, and matches up with my own research and books. I'll put the review on hold. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 14:09, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for Reviewing Ritchie.--DavidCane (talk) 23:29, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

Okay, that all looks resolved, so I'm passing the review now. We seem to have quite a few Northern line GAs now; I wonder how many are left? Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 10:06, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

Ritchie, thanks very much for the speedy review.--DavidCane (talk) 20:37, 18 April 2018 (UTC)