GA review (see
here for what the criteria are, and
here for what they are not)
It is reasonably well written.
a (prose, spelling, and grammar): The article is readable and well-written. b (
MoS for
lead,
layout,
word choice,
fiction, and
lists): The article is generally well-layed out and is effectively summarized in the lede.
a (
reference section): b (citations to
reliable sources): In general, it looks good. I note that there are some appropriately used primary sources and that nycsubway.org seems to be equivalent to a citation of a local historical group. c (
OR): Some things are cited to images that I think would be best cited elsewhere. However, it is only a matter of opening the image and counting what appears, so I think it is acceptable. d (
copyvio and
plagiarism): No issues were found with Earwig.
It is broad in its coverage.
a (
major aspects): No major aspects seem to be missed. b (
focused): Th article seems to be reasonably focused and give due weight to recent events.
Fair representation without bias: This article is about a non-controversial topic, which it presents with a NPOV.
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.: I found no recent edits indicative of content disputes.
It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free content have
fair use rationales): All images are either appropriately licensed or used with appropriate non-free use rationale. b (
appropriate use with
suitable captions): All images have appropriate captions. However, none of the images have alt-text.
GA review (see
here for what the criteria are, and
here for what they are not)
It is reasonably well written.
a (prose, spelling, and grammar): The article is readable and well-written. b (
MoS for
lead,
layout,
word choice,
fiction, and
lists): The article is generally well-layed out and is effectively summarized in the lede.
a (
reference section): b (citations to
reliable sources): In general, it looks good. I note that there are some appropriately used primary sources and that nycsubway.org seems to be equivalent to a citation of a local historical group. c (
OR): Some things are cited to images that I think would be best cited elsewhere. However, it is only a matter of opening the image and counting what appears, so I think it is acceptable. d (
copyvio and
plagiarism): No issues were found with Earwig.
It is broad in its coverage.
a (
major aspects): No major aspects seem to be missed. b (
focused): Th article seems to be reasonably focused and give due weight to recent events.
Fair representation without bias: This article is about a non-controversial topic, which it presents with a NPOV.
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.: I found no recent edits indicative of content disputes.
It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free content have
fair use rationales): All images are either appropriately licensed or used with appropriate non-free use rationale. b (
appropriate use with
suitable captions): All images have appropriate captions. However, none of the images have alt-text.