Wikipedia:Peer review/Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority/archive1

Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority


This peer review discussion has been closed. I've worked a lot on the MARTA article in the past year and a half with several other core editors. About 9 months ago the article achieved GA status. I would like to continue improving the artice, perhaps to FA status, but I am unsure of what areas need improvement. Thanks, Biomedeng (talk) 04:12, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
 * A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style. If you would find such a review helpful, please click here. Thanks, APR t 15:23, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Some comments: Per WP:LEAD, the lead should summarize the whole article and should at least mention (even if only a word or phrase) all of the headers and subheaders in the article. You need to do this. Images are supposed to be set to "thumb" size so the reader's preference takes over, although sometimes a map can be made larger to help with legibility. One of the images have no caption Image:MARTA Rail Map.svg and one needs better explanation of the numbers in it Image:Beltline-breaks.png. Every paragraph needs at least one reference (the first two in "Heavy rail network" have none). Include dates in information that is likely to change, one example is the "Fare structure and operation" section. Headers should not have the title in them, so "Misuse of MARTA funds by employees for personal expenses" could be "Misuse of funds by employees for personal expenses" as one example. The references mostly do not follow the MOS: internet sources should have the url, publisher, the date accessed, and the title. Some sections are pretty list-y too. Hope this helps, Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 03:19, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the feedback. I know the references need to be formatted and that is a big task when I have some time.  Thanks for the head up on the lead section...I will star working on that.  I will also change up the images and add references to the sections that have none.  All of this critique really helps.  Thanks.  Biomedeng (talk) 02:34, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I have implemented some of the changes and used strikethrough to corss them off. I will work on the reference formmating when I have more time.  Biomedeng (talk) 03:39, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I updated the references so that they all follow the MOS and also added additional references to the sections/paragraphs that were largely unreferenced. Any additional feedback is welcome.  Biomedeng (talk) 01:05, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I have removed lists and instead incorporated the information into prose/paragraph format. I feel I have now addressed all of these suggestions and any additional feedback for the article would be most appreciated.  Biomedeng (talk) 04:09, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Avoid having images on both sides of the text - the end of the article is image-poor, so one or two could perhaps be moved down there. Also might want to request a copy edit. Hope this helps and thanks for your reviews here, Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 04:27, 4 March 2008 (UTC)