Talk:Chelsea station (MBTA)/GA1
Appearance
GA Review
[edit]GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Eviolite (talk · contribs) 07:00, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
I'll be looking at this one tomorrow. eviolite (talk) 07:00, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
- It is reasonably well written.
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- a (reference section):
b (citations to reliable sources):
c (OR):
d (copyvio and plagiarism):
- a (reference section):
- It is broad in its coverage.
- a (major aspects):
b (focused):
- a (major aspects):
- It follows the neutral point of view policy.
- Fair representation without bias:
- Fair representation without bias:
- It is stable.
- No edit wars, etc.:
- No edit wars, etc.:
- It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
- a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales):
b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
- a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales):
- Overall:
- Pass/Fail:
- Pass/Fail:
Images:
- All good - haven't seen annotated images being used for crops before, but it's probably fine
- Although, the caption for the map should read "East Everett station" instead of "The station" as it's ambiguous
Done
Sourcing:
- Not sure what the Flickr image is meant to be citing
- Otherwise, everything is good
Lead:
- "The Boston and Maine Railroad and predecessor Eastern Railroad served an East Everett station nearby from 1880 until around 1950." This feels a bit awkward, maybe "From 1880 to around 1950, the Eastern Railroad and the Boston and Maine Railroad served East Everett station, near modern-day Chelsea station."? I'd just prefer to make it explicit the connection between the old railroads and this station
Done Reworded.
Station layout:
- "at Everett Avenue" - maybe "on"?
Done Reworded.
- What does "high-level" mean in this context?
Done Wikilinked.
- Would it be helpful to also add in the fare zone?
- I don't personally think so; while it's standard in the infobox, it doesn't seem particularly relevant in the prose.
History:
- Link Revere, Massachusetts
Done
- Consider linking Main line (railway)
Done
- Why is East Everett bolded?
- It's the target of a redirect that's likely to see use - see MOS:BOLDREDIRECT
Comment: I couldn't find which redirect you referred to so I created East Everett station.
- Thanks! I've added a few categories to the redirect. On the technical side, Adjacent stations modules (Module:Adjacent stations/Boston and Maine Railroad in this case) also can act as redirects.
- It's the target of a redirect that's likely to see use - see MOS:BOLDREDIRECT
- Clarify where Boston and 2nd is in relation to the location of the current station (since there is no context for why a different station in another place is being discussed)
Done
- "began studying an extension of" - consider changing to "began studying a proposed extension of"?
Done
- Is there any more information on the "existing Chelsea station"? I assume this is not the same as the East Everett station so it should probably be talked about (or clarified if it was in a completely different location)
- It's discussed and wikilinked in the previous paragraph.
- " with the commuter rail platforms at Bellingham Square closed at that time" - is there any reason for this?
- As discussed in the paragraph beginning
On October 30, 2013
, the platforms at this Chelsea station were a direct replacement for those at Bellingham Square (which, confusingly, was formerly called Chelsea.) I'm open to any copyediting suggestions.Comment: Maybe it would help if it read "original commuter rail platforms at the site of Bellingham Square station"? Not really sure.
- How does this look?
- As discussed in the paragraph beginning
That's all, again a nice article. @Pi.1415926535: Placing on hold. eviolite (talk) 06:22, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
- @Eviolite: Thanks for the review! I've left my comments above - I implemented most of your suggestions, and I'm open to potential copyediting for the last few paragraphs. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 07:04, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
- @Pi.1415926535: Thanks, responded inline with
Comment:s. eviolite (talk) 13:44, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
- @Eviolite: Replies are above. Cheers, Pi.1415926535 (talk) 21:52, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
- Everything looks good, happy to pass. Great work again, Pi.1415926535. eviolite (talk) 01:55, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
- @Eviolite: Replies are above. Cheers, Pi.1415926535 (talk) 21:52, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
- @Pi.1415926535: Thanks, responded inline with