Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Pocinho railway station/archive1

The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was archived by Ian Rose via FACBot (talk) 27 March 2024 [1].

Pocinho railway station

Nominator(s): V.B.Speranza (talk) 17:13, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about one of Portugal's most significant railway stations. Situated in the northeast region of the country, it holds huge importance for local residents, especially considering the closure of many other railway stations in the area. The centenarian Pocinho station remains operational and flourishing, providing direct access to Porto for regional residents and facilitating tourist visits to the renowned Douro wine region.

V.B.Speranza (talk) 17:13, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

Avoid sandwiching

Suggest adding alt text

Captions need editing for grammar

File:Rede_Complementar_ao_Norte_do_Mondego_-_GazetaCF_372_1903.jpg needs a US tag

File:Station_Pocinho.jpg: what's the copyright status of the artwork? Nikkimaria (talk) 05:19, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Drive-by comments

The capitalisation of "Line" is inconsistent.
The lead should be expanded.
One sentence paragraphs, such as the first one in the description section, should be avoided.
There are some duplicate links within the same section, such as Douro River and Mêda.
Some of the links within see also should not be there as per MOS:NOTSEEAGAIN.

Steelkamp (talk) 05:57, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose from TAOT

Overlinking and duplicate wikilinks are completely out of control
Grammar and writing are in serious need of improvement to meet FA standards.
The article conflates the history of the station and the history of the lines that it is on frequently. The 21st century section hardly says anything about the article's subject and this is also an issue in other sections. Most of the article is off-topic, which by itself would be reason for me to oppose. This is supposed to be about the train station, not the Sabor line or the Douro line.
The article fails to distinguish between the noteworthy and the routine (some kids being arrested for spray-painting a train is not something that is notable for the article)
WP:PROSELINE is omnipresent
Frequent one-sentence paragraphs belie a lack of organization
Fails WP:NOTTIMETABLE
Lead section fails to adequately summarize the body

I could keep going, but suffice it to say this is not ready for FAC. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 20:40, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Coord note -- In light of TAOT's comments in particular, I'm going to archive this and recommend peer review after working on improvements, before another try here at FAC. The FAC mentoring scheme is also an option. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 23:56, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Closing note: This candidate has been archived, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FAC/ar, and leave the {{featured article candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Ian Rose (talk) 23:56, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.