Talk:Hillsboro Central/Southeast 3rd Avenue Transit Center/GA1

GA Review
This review is transcluded from Talk:Hillsboro Central/3rd Avenue Transit Center/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
 * GA review (see here for criteria)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS):
 * Best to remove "among others" in the events described sentence (Art section, para. 1). I would link to burden basket - if the article exists, that (it probably doesn't), or maybe the wiktionary, or even add a definition as a parenthetical statement or footnote. There's also a typo in that sentence.
 * ✅ -Pete (talk)
 * 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):
 * This station is the largest in terms of what? Size, or passenger capacity? " In 2000, a plaque honoring former Hillsboro mayor Shirley Huffman's work getting the westside MAX extended from 185th Avenue to downtown Hillsboro was added to the station." - for completeness, some more info about what Shirley Huffman did (if notable) to get the station would be helpful.
 * ✅ Aboutmovies (talk) 10:17, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Almost there... I'd feel better of the "largest in terms of size" statement was referenced. &mdash; Rob (  talk  ) 13:03, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't understand -- it is referenced. I just checked the source, it clearly states the station would be the largest on the line. Do you want the citation in the middle of the sentence, or..? -Pete (talk) 16:50, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
 * The reference is clearly talking about the physical size of the station as it could not be talking about how busy it is since the article was written three years before the line opened. The largest part is cited in the body, do you also want it cited in the lead? Aboutmovies (talk) 18:13, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Ah, there it is - I guess I missed it the first time, because I remember looking for it in the body and not finding it. My bad. &mdash; Rob (  talk  ) 16:30, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
 * 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:
 * a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Pass/Fail:

Let me know when you've made changes! &mdash; Rob (  talk  ) 19:56, 25 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Looks good, I think it meets GA criteria now. &mdash; Rob (  talk  ) 16:30, 28 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the review Rob -- and, good article, AM -- literally ;) -Pete (talk)
 * Yes, thanks for the review, and Pete thanks for the help. Aboutmovies (talk) 07:33, 29 July 2008 (UTC)