Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Toa Payoh MRT station/archive1

Toa Payoh MRT station

 * Nominator(s): ZKang123 (talk) 07:21, 14 June 2022 (UTC)

This article is about Singapore's oldest MRT station, and this is my 5th FAC nomination. I hope for a successful review, and to have it passed and featured on 7 November. ZKang123 (talk) 07:21, 14 June 2022 (UTC)


 * Image review Licensing looks fine but source is needed in the image description of File:SGMRT-LRT (zoom) map.svg for the location of the transit lines. (t &#183; c)  buidhe  07:41, 14 June 2022 (UTC)


 * Updated image description taken from here.--ZKang123 (talk) 08:04, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
 * That's better but I don't think open street map contributors are a reliable source since it's an open source project just like WP. Is there an official map that could be cited instead for the line layout? (t &#183; c)  buidhe  08:23, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
 * @Buidhe Added OneMap as source ZKang123 (talk) 08:27, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Great, pass ir. (t &#183; c)  buidhe  16:39, 25 June 2022 (UTC)


 * Comments: Overall, a great article! However the prose is not exactly up to par in my opinion. Seeing "station" 4 times in the row at the start of "Station details" paragraphs is both repetitive and boring and some phrases are very ambiguous ("Train frequencies vary"?, "extension of eight months and additional monetary claims in November 1985" – is the extension or the claims made in Nov. 1985? Or is it just the claims?) CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 13:18, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Technical ramblings: Image placement can be improved by moving two center-aligned images to "Station details" section; there's no reason to collapse the track layout template as it is very short; some numbers can be written out such as -> ; "Notes and references" and its child headings are redundant, you only need "Notes" and "References" level 1 heading only; the note itself need wikilinking; DEFAULTSORT is redundant. CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 13:23, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
 * moving two center-aligned images to "Station details" section
 * The two center-aligned images are there rather than in "Station details" as a compromise solution. Reason being that the track layout is floated right (seems to be the norm in these articles) and depending on screen/browser width, text size or zoom settings, it can interact with the infobox to cause really awkward layout, something like this. clear has been applied before the "Station details" heading to remedy that, but it causes a different issue on wider screens, leaving a really large blank space between sections due to the height of the infobox. The images help fill that space. 2406:3003:2077:1E60:C998:20C6:8CCF:5730 (talk) 09:01, 1 July 2022 (UTC)
 * @CactiStaccingCrane made changes as per requested ZKang123 (talk) 06:35, 3 July 2022 (UTC)
 * 2406:3003:2077:1E60:C998:20C6:8CCF:5730: I understand, thanks for the explanation. ZKang123: Thanks for your edits! I don't think my reviews are comprehensive enough for a support, but I do think that the prose is better now. CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 08:17, 3 July 2022 (UTC)

Comments from ChrisTheDude

 * "this station is integrated" - I would just say "the station is integrated". It's clear that in the article you are only going to be talking about this station.
 * Fixed.--ZKang123 (talk) 08:04, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
 * It looks ever so slightly odd to have two images floating above the text in the first section but I guess there is nowhere else for them to go
 * Seems someone moved them around for me.--ZKang123 (talk) 08:04, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
 * "A plaque at this station" => "A plaque at the station"
 * Fixed.--ZKang123 (talk) 08:04, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
 * "the contractor requested for an extension of eight months and additional claims" - I don't think this makes sense. What were the "additional claims"?
 * Monetary claims. Fixed.--ZKang123 (talk) 08:04, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
 * "It was later announced in September 1987 that the section will open on 7 November that year" => firstly, this should be "It was later announced in September 1987 that the section would open on 7 November that year". And secondly, in the previous sentence you said it was set to open in 1988.  Do we have any info on why they were able to open it ahead of schedule?
 * Source states that the MRT construction had plenty of public support and MRTC ability to coordinate the MRT projects.--ZKang123 (talk) 08:04, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
 * "About 44,000 people visited the station" - this is an extremely short sentence, I would combine it with the previous one
 * Added "During the preview," at start of sentence.--ZKang123 (talk) 08:04, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
 * "But many expressed excitement and curiosity" - can't start a sentence with "But". Just remove the word completely, it will still make sense
 * Fixed.--ZKang123 (talk) 08:04, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
 * "with plenty others" => "with plenty of others"
 * Fixed.--ZKang123 (talk) 08:04, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
 * "On the day itself, the emergency button was activated at this station" => "On the day itself, the emergency button was activated at Toa Payoh"
 * Fixed.--ZKang123 (talk) 08:04, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
 * "On 8 January 2006, this station" => "On 8 January 2006, Toa Payoh"
 * Fixed.--ZKang123 (talk) 08:04, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
 * "The station has two underground levels: The upper" - the second "the" does not start a new sentence so should not have a capital letter
 * Fixed.--ZKang123 (talk) 08:04, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
 * That's what I got on a first pass! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:46, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
 * @ChrisTheDude Any further comments? ZKang123 (talk) 12:59, 6 July 2022 (UTC)


 * looks ever so slightly odd to have two images floating above the text
 * I've attempted some layout tweaks, hopefully the new image placement is less awkward for the overall layout.
 * For History section, highlight the commemorative plaque by placing it at top of section. Float left.
 * Put photos of concourse and platform levels together in horizontal gallery at bottom of History section. Thumbnail heights matched, align centered
 * These could have been used to accompany the text description in the Station details section. But for layout reasons, putting here helps fills space (esp. on desktops with larger screens) before the clear needed ahead of Station details and Routemap.
 * HTH! — 2406:3003:2077:1E60:C998:20C6:8CCF:5730 (talk) 06:16, 22 June 2022 (UTC)


 * Hi, I was wondering if you felt in a position to either support or oppose this nomination? Obviously, neither is obligatory. Thanks. Gog the Mild (talk) 14:48, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I forgot all about this one. I'll try and take a look tomorrow as I am going out for my wedding anniversary tonight :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:00, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
 * No sense of priority, that's the trouble with some people! ;-) Cheers CtD, have a good one. Gog the Mild (talk) 15:05, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:33, 8 July 2022 (UTC)

Lead

 * "HDB (Housing and Development Board)" - Should the full name be mentioned before the abbreviation?
 * Fixed.--ZKang123 (talk) 08:04, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
 * "Lorong 1 Toa Payoh, Lorong 2 Toa Payoh and Lorong 6 Toa Payoh" - Are these all street names?
 * Eh yes. (also lit means Toa Payoh Lane 1, 2, 6 etc)--ZKang123 (talk) 08:04, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
 * By the way, what does Toa Payoh mean? You may want to expand the lead a bit with details such as the station design and etymology.
 * Actually in the GA reviewed version the etymology was there. Then I removed it at some point because some other GA stated that wasn't necessary. Might re-include.--ZKang123 (talk) 08:04, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I think it would be good if you did include a brief etymology here, given how you included such an etymology before. Epicgenius (talk) 15:10, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
 * "The station was constructed as part of Phase I of the MRT system." - You may want to add details about when Phase I was proposed and when construction started, since you already have details about when construction was completed and when the station opened.
 * I already stated late when construction started. Oh nvm, thought you were talking about the body. Fixed.--ZKang123 (talk) 08:04, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Yeah, these comments are solely about the lead. Epicgenius (talk) 15:10, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
 * "On 7 November 1987, the station was one of the first MRT stations to open for revenue service." - I'd split this into two ideas, e.g. "The station opened on 7 November 1987 and was one of the first MRT stations to operate in revenue service."

I will leave more comments later. – Epicgenius (talk) 16:54, 24 June 2022 (UTC)


 * Should the full name be mentioned before the abbreviation?
 * An unusual situation, because the building is properly named "HDB Hub", using the abbreviation rather than the full name of the government body that it houses(ha!). I will tweak the phrasing.
 * Are these all street names?
 * Yes. Tweaked wording before to "underneath the street intersection between..." to help make that more explicit. Those are the official street names used in English (originating from Malay), so replacing with a translation isn't appropriate. Would a wiktionary link help?
 * what does Toa Payoh mean?
 * It is a place name; the article for that has been linked, and does discuss its etymology. The station being named for the area it serves is unremarkable and I don't think it really merits further elaboration.
 * split this into two ideas
 * Agreed and done.
 * – 2406:3003:2077:1E60:C998:20C6:8CCF:5730 (talk) 18:57, 24 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Regarding your second reply: yes, a Wiktionary link will be very helpful, as it's not a particularly common term in most of the English-speaking world. As for what Toa Payoh means, I would like to know the nominator's opinion on including etymology. While it may seem evident that the station is named after the planning area, other articles about MRT stations, such as Dhoby Ghaut, do explain the station's etymology in the article itself. – Epicgenius (talk) 04:37, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

History
More later. Epicgenius (talk) 15:10, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
 * "Toa Payoh station was included in the early plans of the MRT network in May 1982." - This should probably be "the early plans of the MRT network, published in May 1982".
 * Fixed.--ZKang123 (talk) 08:02, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
 * "as part of the Phase I MRT segment" - Should this be "as part of the Phase I segment of the MRT"?
 * Hmm, as there's like '...of the a of the b', I find this alternative to be even weirder. Perhaps because of how repetitive it is?--ZKang123 (talk) 08:02, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
 * "This segment was given priority as it passes through areas" - There is a tense mismatch; it should probably be "passed through areas".
 * Fixed.--ZKang123 (talk) 08:02, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
 * "The line aimed to relieve the traffic congestion on the Thomson–Sembawang road corridor." - Relieving congestion specifically on that road, or on a general corridor?
 * I think a general road corridor.--ZKang123 (talk) 08:02, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
 * "the Toa Payoh and Novena station" - The word "stations" should be plural.
 * Fixed.--ZKang123 (talk) 08:02, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
 * "the Toa Payoh Central bus terminal was relocated to an adjacent site" - Was this because the bus station was right above the MRT station site?
 * Yep as stated in source.--ZKang123 (talk) 08:02, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
 * "beginning of the MRT network construction" - I suggest "beginning of the construction of the MRT network".
 * Similarly, I feel '...of the a of the b', to be even weirder.--ZKang123 (talk) 08:02, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
 * "Due to various soil conditions, " - This was announced after the topping-out?
 * Yep in November 1985.--ZKang123 (talk) 08:02, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
 * "It was later announced in September 1987 that the section would open earlier on 7 November" - First, I would delete "later". Second, instead of saying "the section would open earlier on 7 November", I would say "the section's opening date was rescheduled to 7 November" (the reader presumably already knows that 7 November is an earlier date than early 1988).
 * Fixed.--ZKang123 (talk) 08:02, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
 * "the station was opened for a preview" - I'd say something like "the station hosted a preview"
 * Fixed.--ZKang123 (talk) 08:02, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
 * "Many expressed excitement and curiosity, with plenty of others planning to take the MRT ride on the system's debut" - You may want to say which news source reported this. Otherwise it may be seen as a bit irrelevant
 * Well, I did a bit more elaboration to highlight the people's experiences of visiting the early stations.--ZKang123 (talk) 08:02, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
 * "was the most visited out of the opened stations" - This wording is a bit weird. I'd say "was the most visited station on the newly completed line" or something like that.
 * Fixed.--ZKang123 (talk) 08:02, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
 * "backed and commissioned the planning" - I'd also rephrase "backed" as it's a bit vague. For example, if Cheong funded the project, say "funded". If he championed the construction of the MRT system, say something like "advocated for".
 * Fixed.--ZKang123 (talk) 08:02, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
 * "inaugurated the start of MRT operations" - This phrasing is a bit redundant; one would not inaugurate the end of something. I'd say "inaugurated MRT operations" or, even better, "started MRT operations".
 * Fixed.--ZKang123 (talk) 08:02, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
 * "On the day itself" - I'd also get rid of "itself" since the reflexive pronoun isn't used like that.
 * Fixed.--ZKang123 (talk) 08:02, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
 * "flood prevention measures at this station, alongside 11 other MRT stations" - Do you know what types of measures? Also, I suggest "along with" rather than "alongside".
 * Added flood barriers as one of the prevention measures.--ZKang123 (talk) 08:02, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
 * @Epicgenius Any further comments? ZKang123 (talk) 06:30, 3 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I forgot about this. I will add more comments in a bit. – Epicgenius (talk) 21:50, 3 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi, I think it's been a bit, we'll be looking to close if you can't get back shortly... Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 19:02, 31 July 2022 (UTC)
 * @Ian Rose, I actually already reviewed the rest of the article below. I thought the nominator had resolved all of these issues satisfactorily, so I supported the nomination. Sorry for the confusion. – Epicgenius (talk) 19:05, 31 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Ugh, sorry, that'll teach me to get caught up in versions from the history and forget to look again at the current page before pinging... :-P Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 19:08, 31 July 2022 (UTC)
 * So I believe this is eligible for the bronze star then? (Definitely not squealing in anticipation)@Ian Rose? ZKang123 (talk) 13:54, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Station details

 * "Toa Payoh serves the North South line (NSL) between the Braddell and Novena stations." - The current sentence makes it sound like Toa Payoh serves the NSL, which only runs between Braddell and Novena. I'd separate the sentence into two ideas, e.g. "Toa Payoh serves the North South line (NSL) and is between the Braddell and Novena stations on that line."
 * "Being part of the NSL, the station is operated by SMRT Trains" - Do you mean that SMRT operates the NSL and all stations on that line? If so, you should say that directly.
 * "The station is also situated" - The word "situated" is unnecessary.
 * "Toa Payoh means 'big swamp’ in the Hokkien dialect (with ‘Toa’ meaning ‘big’ and ‘Payoh’ meaning ‘swamp’), a reference to the large swampy area which existed prior to the development of Chinese market gardens in the area" - A couple issues here:
 * This is a long sentence. I would recommend splitting this into two sentences or, at the very least, adding a semicolon between the two parts of the sentence.
 * I think "in the area" is also repetitive; I'd say something like "there". E.g.: "Toa Payoh means 'big swamp’ in the Hokkien dialect (with 'Toa' meaning 'big' and 'Payoh' meaning 'swamp'); the name is a reference to the large swampy area which existed prior to the development of Chinese market gardens there".
 * "The station has two underground levels: the conourse at the upper level and the platforms at the lower level" - The word "concourse" is misspelled. Additionally, you can simplify this by saying "The station has two underground levels: the concourse above and the platforms below." Or "The station is underground, with a concourse on the upper level and the platforms on the lower level".
 * "has the island platform arrangement" - This can be simplified to "has an island platform".

More later. – Epicgenius (talk) 20:26, 4 July 2022 (UTC)
 * @Epicgenius Addressed issues above. ZKang123 (talk) 12:59, 6 July 2022 (UTC)
 * "Toa Payoh is also one of the few stations on the initial network to have a lofty ceiling." - How so? How many metres high does a ceiling have to be in order to be considered "lofty"? If you mean "double-height ceiling", that may make more sense.
 * Similarly, do you know what sizes of crowds the station is supposed to accommodate.
 * "reflected on the pillars and canopies" - Unless it's literally reflective, you can just remove the word "reflected", e.g. "Toa Payoh station uses a bright yellow colour scheme for its pillars and canopies".
 * "features a 'rainbow dressing'" - It may be better to specify that this is a mural when you first mention it.
 * "the station features The Toa Payoh Story" - The word "features" was used in the previous paragraph. I would reword it to something different. e.g. "contains"
 * "this mural intends to tie the area's significance to major milestones in Singapore's history." - I think it is better to say "the artists intended for the mural to tie the area's significance to major milestones in Singapore's history".
 * That's it from me. – Epicgenius (talk) 18:16, 6 July 2022 (UTC)
 * They (LTA or MRTC) haven't really specified much about the height. And it also isn't clear how many people the station is supposed to accomodate. Addressed other points raised. ZKang123 (talk) 01:39, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Support - Looks good to me. It's all right if you couldn't find stats about the height or crowds; I just thought these facts would benefit from some elaboration. – Epicgenius (talk) 05:11, 7 July 2022 (UTC)

Source review
Footnote numbers refer to this version. Links and reliability look good. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 19:47, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
 * I see some inconsistencies in the formatting. You give a domain name for the work parameter in [2], [16] and a few others, and in some of those cases you omit the publisher parameter.  Any consistent approach is fine but I don't see the logic here.  It's usual to only give the domain name if there's no clear name for the website, but that's rare.
 * [40] needs a page number in the cite.
 * How does [2] support the text it cites? The link is dead and the archive link only goes up to 2016, and it's not clear that that graph relates to Toa Payoh in any case.
 * Why is [28] cited? I don't see anything in the archived page that relates to the text it supports.
 * Huh didn't realise there's a source review until now!
 * Addressed the publisher format, though there might be a couple few I've missed out. I recall a user remarking their preference for the publisher parameter, but I'm a bit on the fence, because other users prefer the domain name. If you think I should remove the domain name then I might do that.
 * The requirement is consistency. If you want to use domain name for publisher throughout, that's fine, so long as you do it everywhere.  Domain name for work everywhere would also be OK though that's probably less helpful to the reader; again you'd have to do it everywhere, for consistency.  You can certainly use both publisher and work, and lots of people do, and you can have a rule such as "use work in every case; only use publisher where it's not obvious from the work", which would mean for example that "work=New York Times" would not get a publisher parameter, since the publisher is the New York Times, but "work=Billboard" would need "publisher=Penske Media Corp".  The most common rule I see is to use work only, not to use publisher, and not to use domain names for the work parameter unless no website name is apparent.  And in case it's not clear the rule can vary by citation type, if you want it to; books often get publishers but websites often don't.  Again the key is consistency -- whatever rule you pick has to be consistently applied. Mike Christie (talk - contribs -  library) 11:34, 22 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Made further rectifications ZKang123 (talk) 05:51, 23 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Added page number
 * Actually that's the website from which you generate the data for the passenger numbers... It's a bit complex to get the data and I could probably only cite the source and that's the website. Updated link to the new domain.
 * One way to address this sort of thing is to put instructions in the citation, telling the reader what they have to enter to get to the supporting information. See [300] in Mick Jagger, for example; that says '"British album certifications – Mick Jagger". British Phonographic Industry. Retrieved 20 August 2019. Select albums in the Format field. Type Mick Jagger in the "Search BPI Awards" field and then press Enter. '  I believe that particular one is generated by a template but you could reproduce something along those lines manually. Mike Christie (talk - contribs -  library) 11:34, 22 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Hmm I'm not sure under what parameter for "Cite web" it should be in. But the instructions are as follows: You need to be a registered DataMall subscriber to get an Account Key. Using the following API guide, you can generate the url for the passenger volume data (as per Page 23) via Postman Monitors. ZKang123 (talk) 05:55, 23 July 2022 (UTC)
 * If it's subscription required, then I don't think it's necessary. You could add the subscription icon. Mike Christie (talk - contribs -  library) 10:34, 23 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Alright did that. ZKang123 (talk) 07:05, 24 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Removed citation 28.
 * Thanks for the source review so far! ZKang123 (talk) 07:44, 22 July 2022 (UTC)

The consistency is the only remaining issue. A couple of questions (footnote numbers refer to [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Toa_Payoh_MRT_station&oldid=1099904261 this version): -- Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 10:56, 23 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Still some websites using domain name: [16], [23], [28], [32], [33], [34], [36], [38], [40], [47], [48]
 * No publisher on [28]
 * Alright fixed accordingly. Since some of the publisher parameters is the same as the website name, I removed the publisher parameters in favour of the website parameter. ZKang123 (talk) 07:23, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

Pass. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 11:49, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

Comments from Mike Christie
I've copyedited; please revert if you disagree with any of my changes. Generally this looks in good shape and I expect to support. It was interesting to see the mention of Braddell; that prompted me to check a map and discover that the station is only a few yards from where I used to live, on Braddell Hill, many years ago. Per Google Street View it looks very different now! Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 19:27, 29 July 2022 (UTC)
 * I'm confused by some of the dates. The history section talks about 1986/87 plans for construction, and then jumps back in time to say construction actually began three years earlier.  Can you clarify the sequence of events here?
 * "The Toa Payoh Central bus terminal was relocated to an adjacent site as the station was to be constructed on the original site": suggest "The station was constructed on the site of the Toa Payoh Central bus terminal, which was relocated to an adjacent site".
 * You say "Construction started in October 1983, with expected completion in early 1988" and then a couple of sentences later repeat the information with a bit more detail: "Construction of the tunnels between Toa Payoh and Novena began with a groundbreaking ceremony at Shan Road on 22 October 1983". I would combine these two and move the sentence about the bus terminal before or after the combined sentences.
 * "Tunnels were driven in either direction from that shaft, but generally, the composition of the ground was of either sandstone, granite, marine clay, or decomposed rocks": why "but"? "But" implies that there was something surprising about the composition, which seems unlikely.
 * "The earlier opening was due to the cooperation of the public and the Mass Rapid Transit Corporation's ability to coordinate across various construction projects." This seems vague.  How can public cooperation help a construction project?  And the second part just sounds like the MRT Corp blowing their own horn; doesn't it just mean "because we're really good at project management"?  I would be tempted to leave this out completely.
 * I will address these comments likely tomorrow or Monday, because I will be on holiday. Thanks for this additional review however. ZKang123 (talk) 23:42, 29 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Alright so looking through:
 * For the first point, I did a little more digging. I think these three phases were the finalised full initial network of the MRT. The full details of the first phase (Business Times source) was announced in November 1982 or so, after the government approved plans for the MRT construction in May. The scope of Phase I was further expanded to include other stations in June 1983.
 * Did the rephrasing for the two other points.
 * Removed the 'but' and reword. You might want to check the original source for reference.
 * Might remove this coporate fluff then. This was included to explain why the construction was brought forward earlier, but it seemed inadequate.
 * ZKang123 (talk) 09:29, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

Support. Fixes look good. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 13:18, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

Query to FAC coordinator
coordinators may I ask if this is elligble for FA? It has passed IR and SR and has three supports. ZKang123 (talk) 14:01, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Gog the Mild (talk) 14:06, 9 August 2022 (UTC)