Talk:Charles/MGH station/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Reviewer: ArnabSaha (talk · contribs) 06:42, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria


 * 1) 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:
 * 1) 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&mdash;science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines:
 * C. It contains no original research:
 * D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
 * 1) 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):
 * 1) Is it neutral?
 * It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
 * 1) 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:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
 * 1) 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:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * Pass or Fail:

Comments

 * "Three southbound trains collided inside the Beacon Hill Tunnel just south of the station on August 1, 1975, injuring 132 passengers." - this doesn't fit in 'Modifications'.  Saha ❯❯❯  Stay safe    07:57, 15 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, there's no better place to put it, as the history is more or less chronological. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 16:53, 15 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Any modifications made after this? Also, one thing can be done, making a separate section 'Incidents' and describing it as the incident seems serious. (mainly suggested by epicgenius in discord)  Saha ❯❯❯  Stay safe    15:25, 16 October 2020 (UTC)
 * I've adjusted the section title to mention the MBTA, as I don't think a separate heading is needed for a one-line summary of that collision. Does that work? Pi.1415926535 (talk) 17:13, 16 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes, it's better now.  Saha ❯❯❯  Stay safe  </b> </b> 05:26, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
 * If possible, rewrite them "...replaced the BERy in 1947. In 1965, the MBTA designed..." as the years, 1965 is right after 1947. <b style="border:1px solid black"> <b style="color:#FF0000">Saha</b> ❯❯❯ <b style="color:#0043AF"> Stay safe  </b> </b> 12:42, 16 October 2020 (UTC)