Talk:Woodleigh MRT station/GA1

GA review

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

Reviewer: Sammi Brie (talk · contribs) 04:06, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
It is reasonably well written. a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): It is factually accurate and verifiable. a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism): It is broad in its coverage. a (major aspects): b (focused): It follows the neutral point of view policy. Fair representation without bias: It is stable. No edit wars, etc.: 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):
Overall: Pass/Fail:
· · ·

Woodleigh was not planned to open along with the other NEL stations. The station would only — Consider joining with semicolon
In "Station details", the second paragraph has some choppy short sentences that could use some reflow to sound better.
"The experts in Edinburgh" — since these experts are new to the reader, I wouldn't use a definite article. "Experts in Edinburgh..." This could also perhaps be joined by semicolon with the preceding sentence.

Refs are archived.
Images have alt tags and are suitably licensed. The image in the History section probably should be left-aligned; I know this isn't always the best option, but I'd rather have some balance in the layout than what's lopsided.
Earwig reveals only quotes and common phrases in similarity.

Just a bit of prose fine-tuning and moving that one image over and you have a GA, ZKang123. Ping me when changes have been made. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 04:20, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Addressed above issues. @Sammi Brie ZKang123 (talk) 09:49, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]