History"At first, Blindern was considered to be the best transfer point, but it was later decided that creating an all-new station would be better." - Better how? Would it "provide more efficient transfers"? If it was "better" I think we need to know why, otherwise it is fine to just simply state it was decided to be built there instead.
History "There were complaints from local residents that the increased traffic on the line was causing too much noise, and neighbors demanded that noise shields be built." - Were the noise shields ever built?
This one is still an issue, but I'm willing to let it slide due to a lack of information. I would suggest further research and adding this info at some point in the future. --
ErgoSum88 (
talk)
01:09, 7 May 2009 (UTC)reply
Facilities"Both stations are open, but have sheds in each direction. They were drawn by Arkitektskap." - Who is Arkitektskap? Also, these two sentences could be combined for better readability.
IntroThe introduction is a little weak. The article itself is not that big, but there should be some mention of interesting or notable points from the history, facilities, and service sections. You don't need to add too much, just a few more sentences will suffice. Please see
WP:LEAD for more info.
Sorry for the late reply—I've been away on a short holiday. I have adressed all the issues except the noise shields. Despite looking for it, I could not find any news on either construction or non-constructions. I would presume it was built, but I cannot be 100% sure. I am not quite sure how to formulate this without leaving the reader with a question, and not knowing the answer myself. I still find it important to include since the matter was the main objection to building the station. Arsenikk(talk)22:24, 5 May 2009 (UTC)reply
History"At first, Blindern was considered to be the best transfer point, but it was later decided that creating an all-new station would be better." - Better how? Would it "provide more efficient transfers"? If it was "better" I think we need to know why, otherwise it is fine to just simply state it was decided to be built there instead.
History "There were complaints from local residents that the increased traffic on the line was causing too much noise, and neighbors demanded that noise shields be built." - Were the noise shields ever built?
This one is still an issue, but I'm willing to let it slide due to a lack of information. I would suggest further research and adding this info at some point in the future. --
ErgoSum88 (
talk)
01:09, 7 May 2009 (UTC)reply
Facilities"Both stations are open, but have sheds in each direction. They were drawn by Arkitektskap." - Who is Arkitektskap? Also, these two sentences could be combined for better readability.
IntroThe introduction is a little weak. The article itself is not that big, but there should be some mention of interesting or notable points from the history, facilities, and service sections. You don't need to add too much, just a few more sentences will suffice. Please see
WP:LEAD for more info.
Sorry for the late reply—I've been away on a short holiday. I have adressed all the issues except the noise shields. Despite looking for it, I could not find any news on either construction or non-constructions. I would presume it was built, but I cannot be 100% sure. I am not quite sure how to formulate this without leaving the reader with a question, and not knowing the answer myself. I still find it important to include since the matter was the main objection to building the station. Arsenikk(talk)22:24, 5 May 2009 (UTC)reply