Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Copenhagen Metro stations/archive1


 * The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by Dabomb87 16:03, 2 February 2010.

List of Copenhagen Metro stations

 * Nominator(s): Arsenikk (talk)  12:34, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

This list of the stations of the Copenhagen Metro fits into a growing number of metro station lists. I feel the article now meets the FL criteria, but if there are any comments or feedback, I am more than happy to look into it and amend the article as needed. Arsenikk (talk)  12:34, 20 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment: You probably need to change the Line column from using images to using text. Accessibility and all that. Also, at least in the future stations table, you list two stations as being termini... which they are, but you don't specify for which line. --Golbez (talk) 11:03, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the feedback. Concerning the termini, it says in the last sentence of the first paragraph: "Line M3 will operate the full circle, while M4 will only operate the eastern half." This should imply that M3 does not have any termini, and that any termini of the City Circle Line would belong to M4. In my opinion this is sufficient, especially since there is a map to the right that shows the circle. I am also a little unsure how to incorporate the more detailed information and where you want it. Concerning the icons, they will either show up as an image or they will show up with the alt-text (M1, M2, M3 and M4). Arsenikk (talk)  10:38, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

Comment Images used in Line column do not need alt text per this guideline because they are purely decorative; also, what does S in the first table stands for? I assume that is for the S-train.— Chris! c / t 02:29, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
 * The info in the Line column is not otherwise available, so those images' alt text ("M1", "M2") should be fine as-is; without the alt text, the visually impaired reader of a table row won't know the row's line. Eubulides (talk) 03:03, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the comments. The 'S' was just a stray letter that must have been put in by mistake—it is now removed. The icons are not purely decorative, so they still need alt texts. Arsenikk (talk)  10:38, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Ok, I thought they are purely decorative.— Chris! c / t 20:30, 22 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Support — Chris! c / t 22:56, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Support. I have found no problems, except that you may want to move 'min' to the caption of the fifth column of the first table. Ruslik_ Zero 15:08, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the support. I have removed 'min' from the list and added a two-word specification of the time scale in the key. Arsenikk (talk)  19:45, 27 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Check the toolbox; there is one dead link (soft 404). Dabomb87 (talk) 22:27, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Amazing how linkrot has reached the level that links become dead during the FL review. I took the opportunity to instead instate the 2009 ridership figures. Arsenikk (talk)  08:49, 14 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Is there any way the text on the map of future stations can be enlarged? At the moment, it is useful only for the shape of the routes, as the text in illegible from the article. Mm40 (talk) 12:54, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I've tried playing around with the map, but this seems to be rather difficult. Although possible, the whole map is scaled to the current dimensions. Making the text by itself larger will make the map look rather ugly in full size. Instead, I can force the image size to 400px, which should make the text readable (since the map is the same width as the current map at the top). Arsenikk (talk)  17:09, 26 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Gladly add my support to this nomination. Great work! KV5  ( Talk  •  Phils ) 13:41, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Comments from 
 * General
 * Alt text, contributors, dab links, and external links all check out fine.
 * Lead
 * The City Circle Line will have 17 stations, of which 2 are existing stations that will become transfer stations, Christianshavn and Kongens Nytorv. -- the ending reads awkwardly, it may just be me but why not state it as 'which 2 (names of cities) are existing stations..' or 'become transfer stations: name of cities.' or 'of which 2, name of cities, are existing...'
 * The new lines will also have a stop at Copenhagen Central Station (København H). -- I had to find out by going to the article that this station is the largest in Denmark, but it would help the reader to state that.
 * The metro and its 34 trains are operated by the private company Metro Service. -- I'm confused, Metro Service is a different company correct?
 * I would add a note about the zones and what they are, because they just randomly appear in the table and the reader knows nothing about them.
 * Key
 * I would add a - template at the end of this section because on my browser the image runs off to the list section.
 * Table
 * Would it look better with the transfer column being centered? Not just the dashes? (same w/ future stations)-- T ru  c o   503 04:13, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback. Nice to get some feedback from someone who isn't too indoctrinated in rail transport and has some tricky questions.
 * I have changed the 17 stations... sentence to The City Circle Line will have 17 stations, with transfer to between the current and new lines at Christianshavn and Kongens Nytorv.
 * I added ..., the largest train station in Denmark.
 * Metroselskabet (a municipal/government-owned company) owns the track and plans the expansions; Metro Service (a private company) runs the trains. This is a consequence of the Danish love of New Public Management, not necessarily logic. It is fairly common way of doing things in Europe. An elaboration about this is covered in the Copenhagen Metro article, which I would suppose the reader would look at if they wanted to know more about the system than simply the stations.
 * Zone info added.
 * The image runs onwards to the list section on my browser too, and I honestly don't see the problem with that. Adding - just makes a whole lot of unnecessary white space under key. Is there somewhere further down this is causing other problems?
 * With the other columns left-aligned, I would say that center-aligning the transfer columns will make the article look messier. I will admit that the current solution looks a bit bad too. Arsenikk <sup style="color:grey;">(talk)  15:39, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
 * How about centering the text of the entire table? Btw, one of the rows is missing a dash.
 * For the image problem, why not just replace the image with one of the ones that appear later and put the one that is there now where the new one was located?-- T ru  c o   503 18:15, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Moved around some of the images and added a dash. As for the alignment, I find center-aligned table a lot more difficult to read; this is mostly because we are accustomed to reading from left to right with a right-aligned border, and the center-alignment also increases the complexity of the text layout, increasing the strain on reading. Center-aligned lists also appear messy. <strong style="color:green;">Arsenikk <sup style="color:grey;">(talk)  18:30, 30 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Support -- All issues fixed, the center aligning is a minor bug but its okay. Meets WP:WIAFL.-- T ru  c o   503 03:56, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.