Talk:Embankment tube station/GA1

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

Reviewer: Miyagawa   (talk)  11:44, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

I will begin the read through and post any queries I have here. Miyagawa  (talk)  11:44, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

No tags, sources look neutral and all very solid. All images are free use from Commons. Would prefer the Embankment roundel in the article somewhere, but that's just my personal preference and by no means any sort of policy. :)

Was concerned initially regarding the length of the Transport Links section, but it's the same length as with the South Kensington tube station GA article. The whole article is all very similarly proportioned.

Dropped the page number from the Harris reference (left in notes) as it's duplicated in notes - just thought it made the references a little tidier, and combined a short sentence in the lead.


 * GA review (see here for criteria)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS):
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars, etc.:
 * 1) 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):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 1) 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):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:

Happy to pass this for GA. Good job.