Talk:Richmond Hill station (LIRR)/GA1

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Vami IV (talk · contribs) 19:23, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

Opening statement

Hello, and come what may from this review, thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. During the review, I may make copyedits, which I will limit to spelling correction and minor changes to punctuation (removal of double spaces and such). I will only make substantive edits that change the flow and structure of the prose if I previously suggested and it is necessary. The Nominator(s) should understand that I am a grammar pedant, and I will nitpick in the interest of prose quality. For responding to my comments, please use  Done,  Fixed,  Added,  Not done,  Doing..., or  Removed, followed by any comment you'd like to make. I will be crossing out my comments as they are redressed, and only mine. A detailed, section-by-section review will follow. –♠Vami_IV†♠ 19:23, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

@Epicgenius: Now for ruin –♠Vami_IV†♠ 19:24, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

Prose

• To quote editor Username6892 (talk · contribs), the lead should discuss the history in brief.
  •  Done @Vami IV: I have done these. epicgenius (talk) 18:36, 21 April 2020 (UTC)
• the station became a hotbed for the homeless along with animals, and an illegal waste dumping site.[12][13][15][16][17][18] This does not need six citations.
  •  Done
• east to Lefferts Avenue.[6][8][9][10] [...] The area has been used as parking space in the past.[12][13][15][16] Nor these four.
  •  Done

GA progress

Good Article review progress box Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV () 3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant () Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.