Talk:Columbia City station/GA1

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

Reviewer: Shearonink (talk · contribs) 18:48, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

I am doing a Review of this article for possible GA status. Shearonink (talk) 18:48, 2 March 2017 (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:
 * Lays everything out within an easy-to-understand timeline. Shearonink (talk) 14:01, 13 March 2017 (UTC)
 * B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
 * Everything in this article is very straightforward. Shearonink (talk) 22:38, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
 * 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:
 * Well-Researched. Shearonink (talk) 14:01, 13 March 2017 (UTC)
 * C. It contains no original research:
 * None that I could find. Shearonink (talk) 22:38, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
 * D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
 * All looks good from the copyvio tool. Shearonink (talk) 22:38, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
 * 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:
 * The article is very stable. Shearonink (talk) 22:38, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
 * 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:
 * The only image is fine. Shearonink (talk) 22:38, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
 * B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * The article looks good so far, will be doing some more readthroughs to catch any possible issues that I might have missed. Shearonink (talk) 22:38, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Congrats, it's a GA. I wanted to say that I especially enjoy how you tied in community reactions to transport in the area over the years and to the building of this station - some human interest helps to leaven all the construction/transport details. Going forward any possible improvements would be keeping the article updated with any changes to the nearby developments.  Oh, I also think Wikilinking Olmsted's name would be a good idea since not everyone knows who Frederick Law Olmsted was. Shearonink (talk) 14:01, 13 March 2017 (UTC)
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * The article looks good so far, will be doing some more readthroughs to catch any possible issues that I might have missed. Shearonink (talk) 22:38, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Congrats, it's a GA. I wanted to say that I especially enjoy how you tied in community reactions to transport in the area over the years and to the building of this station - some human interest helps to leaven all the construction/transport details. Going forward any possible improvements would be keeping the article updated with any changes to the nearby developments.  Oh, I also think Wikilinking Olmsted's name would be a good idea since not everyone knows who Frederick Law Olmsted was. Shearonink (talk) 14:01, 13 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Congrats, it's a GA. I wanted to say that I especially enjoy how you tied in community reactions to transport in the area over the years and to the building of this station - some human interest helps to leaven all the construction/transport details. Going forward any possible improvements would be keeping the article updated with any changes to the nearby developments.  Oh, I also think Wikilinking Olmsted's name would be a good idea since not everyone knows who Frederick Law Olmsted was. Shearonink (talk) 14:01, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

Redlinked articles
Even though this isn't strictly a GA Criteria, I think the amount of redlinks in the article at present is a little much and they should be pruned down a bit (also, "Martin Luther King Jr. Way" is Wikilinked twice - at least one of the Wikilinks should go). Shearonink (talk) 22:38, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
 * I've decided to scrap all the redlinks for now. I plan to create articles for those redlinks and re-add them at a later date (e.g. Draft:Martin Luther King Jr. Way (Seattle)).  Sounder Bruce  02:32, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I kind of figured that they were on your article-schedule, considering your interest in Seattle Washington Transport articles. Shearonink (talk) 02:38, 12 March 2017 (UTC)