Talk:Woodlands South MRT station/GA1

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

Reviewer: Z1720 (talk · contribs) 23:10, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

I will begin a review of this article shortly. Please let me know below if you have any questions. Z1720 (talk) 23:10, 22 January 2022 (UTC)


 * GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):  d (copyvio and plagiarism):
 * 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 and other media, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Comments: See below:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Comments: See below:
 * Comments: See below:


 * General comments


 * I am surprised by the lack of critical commentary on the station. What do reviewers think of the station design? The placement and opening of this station relative to the system? The architecture and artwork displayed inside? This will help put the station in context with the rest of the MRT system and the city.
 * There is also information missing about why this station was built. Why did financers build a station here? What problem was this station solving?
 * To the two above points: There aren't sources with regard to opinion on the station architecture and artwork, and how it's decided to have the station in that location. The Land Transport Authority isn't that open on such decisions.--ZKang123 (talk) 13:19, 23 January 2022 (UTC)


 * Infobox
 * Some information in the infobox is not cited in the article, and should be included in the article with citations. These include:
 * Location "30 Woodlands Drive 17"
 * Added citation--ZKang123 (talk) 13:19, 23 January 2022 (UTC)
 * "(1 island platform)"
 * Added citation to official picture from Aedas.--ZKang123 (talk) 13:19, 23 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Electrified Yes
 * I think it's kind of obvious it's electrified.--ZKang123 (talk)
 * I do not know anything about this system. Although I might assume that a public transit system is electrified, there's no guarentee. I would recommend removing it or citing it. Z1720 (talk) 03:02, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Information about the station's previous names, and when/why it was changed, should be included in the "History" section
 * They aren't really "previous names", but alternative names suggested in a naming poll.--ZKang123 (talk) 13:19, 23 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I recommend that this be specified in a note, stating something like, "These are the alternative names suggested in a naming poll from 20XX." Or remove it altogether, since "previous names" is not the correct descriptor for this information. Z1720 (talk) 03:02, 29 January 2022 (UTC)


 * Article body


 * "Yusof Ishak Mosque as well as Singapore Sports School." Replace "as well as" with "and"
 * Fixed.--ZKang123 (talk) 13:19, 23 January 2022 (UTC)
 * "In July 2013, a S$421 million (US$336.5 million) contract, for the construction of bored tunnels connecting from Woodlands station to Mandai Depot via this station, was awarded to Shanghai Tunnel Engineering Co. Ltd. Tunnelling works was scheduled to begin in August that year." -> "In July 2013, Shanghai Tunnel Engineering Co. Ltd. Tunnelling was awarded a S$421 million (US$336.5 million) contract for the construction of bored tunnels connecting from Woodlands station to Mandai Depot via this station, and work was scheduled to begin a month later."
 * Fixed.--ZKang123 (talk) 13:19, 23 January 2022 (UTC)
 * "Subsequently in August," Delete subsequently.
 * Fixed.--ZKang123 (talk) 13:19, 23 January 2022 (UTC)
 * "It was announced by then Transport Minister Khaw Boon Wan on 19 December 2019 that TEL 1 will open before the end of January 2020." I don't think this sentence is needed: subsequent sentences explain that it was opened in January 2020 so that information is more definitive.
 * Fixed. Removed sentence--ZKang123 (talk) 13:19, 23 January 2022 (UTC)


 * References:
 * No concerns with copyright through earwig
 * Version checked Refs checked: 4, 13, 17, 19, 20
 * Ref 19: little steps should be in quotes in the article.
 * Ref 17: the source says that in on-peak hours trains arrive every 2-3 minutes, so the statement "Train frequencies on the TEL range from 5 to 9 minutes." is not verified in the article.
 * "Trains along the Thomson-East Coast Line (TEL) will arrive at stations every five minutes during peak hours and every nine minutes off-peak, when the second stage of the line opens on Saturday (Aug 28)."
 * "Trains generally arrive at intervals of two to three minutes during peak hours from 7am to 9am on other MRT lines, and five to seven minutes off-peak."
 * From the source in question.--ZKang123 (talk) 13:19, 23 January 2022 (UTC)
 * That was my mistake. Thanks for pointing this out. Z1720 (talk) 03:02, 29 January 2022 (UTC)


 * Images
 * No concerns

I'll put this on hold so the above can be addressed. If more than a week is needed to find critical commentary, please let me know and I will close this GAN as unsuccessful to give time to find more information. Z1720 (talk) 00:03, 23 January 2022 (UTC)


 * I am sorry for the delay in looking at this again. I responded to two points in the infobox section. I looked for additional sources critiquing the architecture or design of the station, but was unable to find anything so I will drop that concern. Once the two infobox points are addressed I think this will be ready to promote. Z1720 (talk) 03:02, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Eh... The article is already a GA... I just need your comments for the FAC... You can bring that up on the FAC nomination page... @Z1720 ZKang123 (talk) 03:05, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks for addressing my concerns. I am going to pass this article to GA status. As for FAC, I think some editors might be concerned about the length of the article. I looked through the two other FAs that you have promoted, both on MRT stations, and they are significantly longer than this article. Some editors might point out that lack of critical commentary that I mentioned above. I would try a deep search on various databases, including a look through WP:LIBRARY (if you haven't already done so), newspaper archives of local papers, and in other languages that you or a colleague may speak (since Singapore, to my understanding, has multiple media languages that might provide commentary on the station). If you open a PR, I would be happy to conduct a thorough prose review; please ping me on the PR if you are interested. Z1720 (talk) 03:18, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Oh wait sorry, I thought you were making more comments on the Nicoll Highway GA review. Just realised this is for Woodlands South. (Facepalm). I've misread. Apologies, but I hope you can also help for Nicoll Highway FAC. I will also deal with your other comments on this. ZKang123 (talk) 03:24, 29 January 2022 (UTC)