Jump to content

Talk:Hougang MRT station

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

Fair use rationale for Image:NS logo.jpg

[edit]

Image:NS logo.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 23:53, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Move discussion in progress

[edit]

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Aljunied MRT Station which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 09:31, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

[edit]
Passed. 🏵️Etrius ( Us) 03:52, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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 toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Hougang MRT station/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Brachy0008 (talk · contribs) 01:01, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@ZKang123? Brachy08 (Talk) 00:46, 4 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]


Hi! I will be reviewing this article. However, I may have found some errors that might not make it a GA:

  • FNs 38-40 can be merged.
  • More sources needed for Art in Transit section.
  • Lead can be expanded
  • Explain what a Civil Defence shelter is, like in MacPherson MRT station
  • Uncurl the quotation marks in the lead.
  • Link "Old Folk's Home"
  • Replace/remove FN11

There might be more I have not found. Btw, I put several [citation needed]s. I’ll put it on hold for the time being. If issues found are not fixed by 8 August, I would have no choice but to fail it, unless you need more time to do so.

I rather you do not review further GANs in the future because you're inexperienced and don't know too much of the criteria. Henceforth, I disagreed with most of the proposed changes above.
"FNs 38-40 can be merged" for example is not a criterion, and the GA criteria don't require every single sentence to be sourced at the very end of the sentence
Besides LTA and the official NEL art book, there are no other sources for Art-in-Transit.
I think I've already talked plenty of what a CD shelter is, and what you quoted from MacPherson MRT station is unsourced.
Lead is expanded a little, but not too much given it's a very brief article.
Uncurled the quote marks, but italicised the title.
FN11 is still a relevant source to explain where the old folks home is currently.
Thanks for the review. ZKang123 (talk) 03:18, 4 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You’re welcome (I’ll leave it to second opinion) Brachy08 (Talk) 03:38, 4 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
P.S. There actually is. That's how I promoted Outram Park MRT station to GA status. Brachy08 (Talk) 05:41, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Here you go Brachy08 (Talk) 05:44, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I admittedly find Outram Park station not deserving of its GA status given there is actually a lot of info I still haven't written, especially on its construction and artwork.
Facebook is not a reliable source. ZKang123 (talk) 05:47, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, just stick with the two sources. Furthermore, the GA requirements do not say "all the stuff related to it should be included", that's for FA. Brachy08 (Talk) 05:48, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@ZKang123, I unfortunately have to agree with you. That being said, the conversation should be dropped, it isn't relevant to this GA review. I'll have my notes out later today. 🏵️Etrius ( Us) 14:45, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Review

[edit]

Images

[edit]

Copy-Vios

[edit]
  • Spot-checks find nothing exciting.
  • Similarly, nothing on Earwig of note

Sources

[edit]
  • A few of these I'll have to take on good faith. What is linked is either live or properly archived.
  • FN 11, Society For The Aged Sick. It is a WP:PRIMARY source, please justify
  • SBS Transit. Not thrilled about this being used as a source, that being said, I see other GAs with this source so I'll allow it.
  • So sources 35-36 and 38-40 can be merged together for simplicity. It would be a nicer format but I don't think there's an MOS that explicitly states this. (optional)
    • I prefer not since it's pretty much a range and would just make entire paragraphs be attributed to a singular source.--ZKang123 (talk)

Prose

[edit]
  • "Hougang MRT station is an underground Mass Rapid Transit (MRT) station on the North East line (NEL). Located in Hougang, Singapore" change to "Hougang MRT station is an underground Mass Rapid Transit (MRT) station on the North East line (NEL), located in Hougang, Singapore."
-adding the location to the first sentence best meets MOS:FIRST and helps the article flow better.


Comment: @Brachy0008:, this is the format I like to follow for GA reviews. It is important to comment that something has been checked, even if there's nothing wrong with the criteria itself. Like I said, GA reviews are lengthy processes, and can take weeks in many cases. If you have any additional comments, feel free to add them to the appropriate subsection. Likewise, if you have any questions, please please please ping me. GAR is essentially a discussion, and the reviewer isn't going to get everything right. It is the nominator's job to clarify certain points if necessary. I also like to leave some general improvements that aren't necessary but can still help the article. There is a level of editor discretion that GARs have, finding a happy medium comes with trial and error. 🏵️Etrius ( Us) 03:20, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@ZKang123:, kicking this back to you. I made some edits myself, please check them when you can. All-in-all good job, it should be simple enough to clean this up. 🏵️Etrius ( Us) 03:20, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@ZKang123 Here are a couple of more things, nearly there. 🏵️Etrius ( Us) 01:42, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Second round

[edit]

Comment by Etriusus

[edit]

I'm gonna be blunt on this one, @ZKang123: please remember WP:AGF. Don't tell users to stop reviewing GAs, everyone has to start somewhere and frankly it isn't conducive to learning. @Brachy0008: Please review the GA criteria, and drop by other reviews in progress to get better familiarized with how GARs are done. I applaud you for Being bold, but GA reviews can be a lengthy process. I see you already got through 2 other reviews without issue, so you do show promise. Brachy0008, in leu of me just taking over this review, would you like to 'tag-team' this? You can have credit for the drive, I would just rather correct whatever issues you may have rather than send you packing. 🏵️Etrius ( Us) 04:58, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Let's tag-team. Brachy08 (Talk) 05:40, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
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.
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Hougang_MRT_station&oldid=1202807944"