Talk:South Attleboro station

South Attleboro station has been listed as one of the Engineering and technology good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review: October 12, 2020. (Reviewed version).

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the South Attleboro station article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Greater Boston Public Transit Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of the Greater Boston Public Transit WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of public transportation in the Greater Boston metropolitan area. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.Greater Boston Public TransitWikipedia:WikiProject Greater Boston Public TransitTemplate:WikiProject Greater Boston Public TransitGreater Boston Public Transit articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Trains: Stations Low‑importance

	Trains Portal
DYK	June 13, 2019

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Trains, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to rail transport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. See also: WikiProject Trains to do list and the Trains Portal.TrainsWikipedia:WikiProject TrainsTemplate:WikiProject Trainsrail transport articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated projects or task forces:
/
	This article is supported by WikiProject Stations.

United States: Massachusetts Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Massachusetts portal This article is supported by WikiProject Massachusetts (assessed as Mid-importance).

GA Review

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

Reviewer: ArnabSaha (talk · contribs) 07:37, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Is it well written?
A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:

B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
Is it verifiable with no original research?
A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:

B. All in-line citations are from reliable sources, including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines:

C. It contains no original research:

D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:

B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
Is it neutral?
It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
Is it stable?
It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:

B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
Overall:
Pass or Fail:

Comments

The first para of 'Bus connections' is unsourced
In infobox parking is 568, in body its 579.
- Both done. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 19:29, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Parking fee not required. Too much detail.

❯❯❯   S A H A 10:25, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

- That's pretty commons for station articles. While I don't love it, parking fees are unfortunately one of the most common things that readers come here looking for. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 20:26, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  - Pi.1415926535 true, but as we are going for GA, it needs to be omitted. ❯❯❯ S A H A 07:28, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    - I disagree. Given that it hasn't been an issue in half a dozen previous GAs of other MBTA Commuter Rail arguments, I don't see why it's an impediment to GA, nor why it is disallowed. Do you have any other comments , or is this the only remaining sticking point? Pi.1415926535 (talk) 07:37, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
      - I will go for a 2nd opinion then. ❯❯❯ S A H A 11:42, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
        @Pi.1415926535: ArnabSaha asked me to provide a second opinion (and I know I'm a little late). Normally I would suggest (but not require) excluding parking fees, since it's a gray area in WP:NOTGUIDE. However, because it's a relatively minor point and such fees are mentioned in similar good articles as well, I'd leave it alone for the sake of consistency. epicgenius (talk) 17:01, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
        
        ~~Pi.1415926535 Good to go. As per the 2nd opinion provided by epicgenius. ❯❯❯ S A H A 14:29, 10 October 2020 (UTC)~~[reply]

Putting on hold due to some issues. Couldn't find the parking space numbers and fees details in the citation. ❯❯❯ S A H A 18:05, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done Added a citation with both. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 07:07, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]