Talk:Yellow Line (Washington Metro)/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: --PCB 20:23, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

GA review (see here for criteria)

Footnote 8 is a dead link.

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

   The prose issues are listed below.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

   There are a couple of reference problems listed below.

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   Rename the extension section to "Future." I think that would make more sense.

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   I will put the article on hold for the prose and reference issues.

Lead and Infobox

• The list of stations in non-peak hours is too detailed and should be removed.
• Can you explain the 18-month trial program (and perhaps mention it outside the lead)?
• The last sentence should be moved to the Route section, or else it should be referenced elsewhere.
• Can you use other words other than "peak"? - official WMATA term, now defined in notes.
• The date and length need to be referenced in the infobox.

History

• The first paragraph is well-written, however, it is almost an exact copy of other articles. I think it should be rephrased.
• When was the original route planned? You never said. - I think it says 1967, which is much later than the rest of the system.
• Almost the entire history outside the first sentence is unreferenced.
• WMATA needs to be spelled out somewhere like this: Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (WMATA)

Extension to Fort Totten

• Need more than one reference for the paragraph.
• Find a better word for "off-peak", it is used very often.

Route

• I believe Kings Highway needs an apostrophe. - All of my sources show no apostrophe.
• Much of it is unreferenced. The paragraph needs more inline citations within the paragraph, not just after it.
• There is a MOSBOLD violation: the bold words should not be bold, they do not redirect here.

List of stations

• Again, find another word for peak.
• I believe the headings like "Stations served during all operating hours" needs to be a third-level heading.
• Move the paragraph about the trains to the Route section.

References

• Footnote 1 needs an accessdate.
• Dates are inconsistent.
• You need an author for Footnote 13 and 14.
• Spell out WMATA.

  Yes, it needs to be spelled out every time even though it is defined in the body. --PCB 21:53, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

Good job. Pass. — PCB 15:02, 6 April 2011 (UTC)