Wikipedia:Peer review/Outram Park MRT station/archive2

Outram Park MRT station

Previous peer review

i've listed this article for peer review because i'm...ready for it another attempt at promoting this article into a featured article. this time, i am willing to do a little peer review to avoid the mistakes that i kinda made at my first attempt (i looked back and improved it to the best of my ability).

the only thing that is different is that i expanded the article from the book sources User:ZKang123 gave (thanks, man =D), so i think it has enough material for it to become a featured article, the only thing that should be addressed is most likely clean-up and stuff.

thanks, brachy08 _{(chat here lol)} 01:00, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

Comments by ZKang123

I decided to give a quick look over this. At this point, it's shaping up well, but I also saw a few other things for improvement.

• Alt text should not merely just repeat the caption. Usually there will be a bit more description. Like the first image, maybe describe more in detail like: "An entrance to the station next to a bus stop, featuring a modern architectural design with a large overhanging white roof supported by distinctive, angled cylindrical columns."
• Lead should be expanded more. Like at least giving an overview of some of the construction challenges. Also, perhaps details on the design and what artworks are displayed there.
• There's this groundbreaking ceremony for the EWL station
• For NewspaperSG links like Ref 10: remove the archive link, since they don't usually work. Also they should use the cite news template and the work be by Singapore Monitor, for instance, and add page numbers. This is essential for source formatting consistency. See Ref 13 on how usually they should be formatted.
• The NEL station has four underground levels, with the second one being out-of-bounds and the first one intended for a public underpass – This bit should actually go under the details section.
• Remove ISSN for Ref 31; usually unnecessary
• On 6 March 2008 in the NEL section of the station – Usually I try to avoid "in the NEL section" but would say at the NEL platforms or concourse
• Ref 39: Don't use Streetdirectory but cite OneMap instead.
• I would actually use SBS Transit or SMRT journeys to cite the surrounding landmarks. Please see Orchard MRT station or Little India MRT station
• Arup also has more details of the current layout of the station. And also an old LTA leaflet. (First page)
• You forgot to mention the TEL artwork for Outram Park.

My overall thoughts: While it's an improvement from the last time I read this, I think there are still a few more gaps before it can be at the FAC stage.--ZKang123 (talk · contribs) 02:51, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

there was mention for TEL's artwork. however, due to well... the GA review, i kinda removed it. shld be an easy fix. brachy08 _{(chat here lol)} 03:57, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

Actuall7

Hello Brachy, good work on this article so far. Just wanted to point out a few issues that I found in it when I read through.

• In the lead's second paragraph, North East line is hyphenated as North-East line despite the name of the line not including a hyphen. The mention of East–West line also uses a hyphen (East-West line) instead of an en dash. World Trade Centre is also misspelt as World Trade Center.
• The lead also doesn't mention the Artworks section of the article.
• Something I'm not too sure about is whether the infobox of the station should have more references, given that some articles reference everything in the infobox whilst others don't.
• The link to Singapore should be removed per WP:OL.
• Certain things throughout the article should be standardised, such as the capitalisation of "line" in the History section headers. Another instance is with the mention of "communications minister" and "Transport Minister".
• S. Iswaran should be linked.
• Not sure if the Incidents section should be included. While it did happen at the station, I'm unsure if it's notable enough to be mentioned.
• In the Details section, you link Havelock and Maxwell as between Havelock and Maxwell stations, when throughout the article mentions of two MRT stations is linked as such: between Tanjong Pagar and Tiong Bahru stations.
• In the Artwork section, it should be Art-in-Transit, not Art in Transit.
• Refs should be standardised, some link The Straits Times, NewspaperSG, eg, while others don't. Standardise the mention of CNA as well, some use CNA while others use Channel News Asia.
• Refs 47, 48, and 49 should be Land Transport Authority as publisher instead of www.lta.gov.sg. Refs 29, 31, 34, and 45 should also be Land Transport Authority (or expanded from LTA).

Hope my suggestions help you and the article gets to FA. actuall7 (talk | contrib) 02:37, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

Drive by comment by S5A-0043

I'm not familiar with the FA criterias so I won't give a full length feedback, but I want to ask on why in the details section the On the EWL, the station ... Tiong Bahru stations. is (somewhat oddly) in a separate paragraph from As of October 2024 ... to 12:10 a.m., while for the NEL and TEL ones the frequency and the adjacent stations are within the same line. I feel that either the EWL adjacent station part should be moved down, or the adjacent station sentences are in the same paragraph and the service timings in another paragraph for consistency. S5A-0043🚎^{(Leave a message here)} 08:04, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

Drive by comment by Icepinner

Similar to S5A, I don't have expereince with FA criteria. This is repetitive from Zkang and Actuall7 but I honestly think there should be some mention of the Art-in-transit artworks in the lead. It has its own section and is decently major so it should be mentioned in the lead. Icepinner (formerly Imbluey2). Please ping me so that I get notified of your response 14:06, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

@Icepinner i should have addressed most of the points in the peer review (including ur ait mention). thanks for the comment =D brachy08 _{(chat here lol)} 02:33, 21 April 2025 (UTC)