Talk:Q70 (New York City bus)/GA1

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

Reviewer: Dom497 (talk · contribs) 00:19, 15 January 2018 (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:
 * On hold for 7 days (starting January 14/18) Passed!
 * 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:
 * On hold for 7 days (starting January 14/18) Passed!
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * On hold for 7 days (starting January 14/18) Passed!
 * On hold for 7 days (starting January 14/18) Passed!

✅
 * Reference #2 is dead.


 * For the table listing all the stops, I think it would help if the notes at the bottom turn into footnotes with links to the appropriate places. (Just like the note that is already in the article).

✅ -- Dom497 ( talk ) 00:32, 15 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Reference #4 seems to provide more recent data then what is presented on the wiki page (the wiki page uses 2015 data).
 * Thank you for reviewing the Q70 and M60 articles. I am also grateful to for fixing the issues in both of them. The only problem is that the notes in the tables (for both articles) are transcluded from the Select Bus Service page. epicgenius (talk) 01:32, 15 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I didn't look at the source code for that table at first but with what you've said it looks like this is something that needs a bigger discussion (outside of the scope of this review) if this change were to ever be made (which was ultimately just a suggestion). On that note, I will pass this nomination!-- Dom497 ( talk ) 01:49, 15 January 2018 (UTC)