Talk:Yellow Line (Washington Metro)/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: --P C B 20:23, 26 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for criteria)

Footnote 8 is a dead link.

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
The prose issues are listed below.
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
There are a couple of reference problems listed below.
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
Rename the extension section to "Future." I think that would make more sense.
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:
I will put the article on hold for the prose and reference issues.

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.

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)

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.

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.

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. --P C B 21:53, 26 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]