Talk:Yellow Line (Washington Metro)/GA1

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

Reviewer: -- P C  B  20:23, 26 March 2011 (UTC)


 * GA review (see here for criteria)

Footnote 8 is a dead link.
 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * The prose issues are listed below.
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * There are a couple of reference problems listed below.
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * Rename the extension section to "Future." I think that would make more sense.
 * 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:
 * I will put the article on hold for the prose and reference issues.
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * I will put the article on hold for the prose and reference issues.

Good job. Pass. &mdash;  P C  B  15:02, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Lead and Infobox
 * The list of stations in non-peak hours is too detailed and should be removed.
 * Can you explain the 18-month trial program (and perhaps mention it outside the lead)?
 * The last sentence should be moved to the Route section, or else it should be referenced elsewhere.
 * Can you use other words other than "peak"? - official WMATA term, now defined in notes.
 * The date and length need to be referenced in the infobox.
 * History
 * The first paragraph is well-written, however, it is almost an exact copy of other articles. I think it should be rephrased.
 * When was the original route planned? You never said. - I think it says 1967, which is much later than the rest of the system.
 * Almost the entire history outside the first sentence is unreferenced.
 * WMATA needs to be spelled out somewhere like this: Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (WMATA)
 * Extension to Fort Totten
 * Need more than one reference for the paragraph.
 * Find a better word for "off-peak", it is used very often.
 * Route
 * I believe Kings Highway needs an apostrophe. - All of my sources show no apostrophe.
 * Much of it is unreferenced. The paragraph needs more inline citations within the paragraph, not just after it.
 * There is a MOSBOLD violation: the bold words should not be bold, they do not redirect here.
 * List of stations
 * Again, find another word for peak.
 * I believe the headings like "Stations served during all operating hours" needs to be a third-level heading.
 * Move the paragraph about the trains to the Route section.
 * References
 * Footnote 1 needs an accessdate.
 * Dates are inconsistent.
 * You need an author for Footnote 13 and 14.
 * Spell out WMATA.
 * Yes, it needs to be spelled out every time even though it is defined in the body. -- P C  B  21:53, 26 March 2011 (UTC)