Talk:Red Line (Washington Metro)/GA3

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 17:30, 5 March 2011 (UTC) GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria[reply]

  1. Is it reasonably well written?
    A. Prose quality:
    B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
  2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
    A. References to sources:
    Retrieval dates are year-month-day, other are month-day, year. Pick one and standardize on it. Cite #4 should be pages, with an n-dash.
    Standardized on month-day, year. Added ndash to fn 4. Racepacket (talk) 04:46, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
    C. No original research:
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. Major aspects:
    History section needs to be enlarged. What areas was the Red Line designed to serve? When did construction begin, etc.?
    The first lead paragraph explains that it links Montgomery county to downtown DC. I will expand the history and have added two system maps. Racepacket (talk) 04:34, 6 March 2011 (UTC) I added sentence re: groundbreaking for Red Line construction. Racepacket (talk) 04:06, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    B. Focused:
  4. Is it neutral?
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. Is it stable?
    No edit wars, etc:
  6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
    A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
    Needs a map showing the line's route. Listing the stations doesn't tell how it fits into the system.
    The first lead paragraph explains that it links Montgomery county to downtown DC. I will expand the history and have added two system maps. There is also a map in the infobox with a show/hide switch. Racepacket (talk) 04:34, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:

As indicated on the reviewer's talk page, I am working to address the concerns noted. Thanks for the review. Racepacket (talk) 04:23, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Good work.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 04:51, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]