Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Great Northern route stations/archive1: Difference between revisions

List of Great Northern route stations (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Nominator(s): JacobTheRox^{(talk | contributions)} 23:44, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This article is a station list for the corresponding Great Northern route, which I created about a month ago and have been working on since. This is my first FLC so do let me know if I have done / am doing anything wrong. Thanks in advance, JacobTheRox^{(talk | contributions)} 23:44, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• I’ll do a full review shortly but one drive-by comment: Italicised lines are those that are not constituent parts of the Great Northern route. is not compliant with accessibility requirements because screen readers used by people with vision issues won’t read out that the text is italicised — ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:37, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Any suggestions as to an alternative? Quite difficult to think of a way of doing it that’s accessible but not obtrusive. The article does mention the constituent lines (Cambridge line, East Coast Main Line, Fen line, Hertford Loop line, Northern City line) and if you want I can repeat that before the start of each table as clarification for those unable to know where the italics are. JacobTheRox^{(talk | contributions)} 19:06, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  You can use a symbol instead of/in addition to the italics. See List of municipalities in Jaén which uses a color and a symbol. Make sure to use a legend too when you do this. –MPGuy2824 (talk) 05:35, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Done as a symbol before each line and no more italics.

  I wouldn’t say a colour is necessary but a symbol would work — ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:25, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Link all the stations named in the lead
• “Govia Thameslink Railway only share eight stations […] this will rise to six” – maths doesn’t seem to be right here
• “confirmed to have funded allocated to them” – funding, surely?
• “Half of the eighteen stations that have been closed did so” => “Half of the eighteen stations that have closed did so” (passive/active verbs don’t work as it stands)
• “London Borough of Enfieldno surface” looks odd and I presume is a typo of some kind
• Notes d, f, j are not sentences so doesn’t need full stops
• There are some duplicate notes which can be combined — ChrisTheDude (talk) 10:25, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hope that’s everything. Thanks for the comments and let me know anything else that needs doing. JacobTheRox^{(talk | contributions)} 17:03, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the comments, JacobTheRox^{(talk | contributions)} 17:03, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Tables need captions, which allow screen reader software to jump straight to named tables without having to read out all of the text before it each time. Visual captions can be added by putting |+ caption_text as the first line of the table code; if that caption would duplicate a nearby section header, you can make it screen-reader-only by putting |+ {{sronly|caption_text}} instead.
• Tables need column scopes for all column header cells, which in combination with row scopes lets screen reader software accurately determine and read out the headers for each cell of a data table. Column scopes can be added by adding !scope=col to each header cell, e.g. ! Year becomes !scope=col | Year. If the cell spans multiple columns with a colspan, then use !scope=colgroup instead. Some of your columns have this, but not all.
• Tables need row scopes on the “primary” column for each row, which in combination with column scopes lets screen reader software accurately determine and read out the headers for each cell of a data table. Row scopes can be added by adding !scope=row to each primary cell, e.g. | 1987 becomes !scope=row | 1987 (on its own line). If

the cell spans multiple rows with a rowspan, then use !scope=rowgroup instead.

Surely a featured list on a route should have a map of the route? Is there any metro map style maps available? I feel this is a critical piece for this list to pass. Mattximus (talk) 16:19, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The map on Great Northern route is wrong; I will make a new one now. JacobTheRox^{(talk | contributions)} 20:45, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Done. JacobTheRox^{(talk | contributions)} 21:12, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I’ll do the source review for this one, poke me if I don’t post anything in a couple days. UpTheOctave! • 8^va? 22:29, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewed Special:Permalink/1312492792

Reliability

• What makes this particular newsletter from RailFuture a reliable source?
  • It is a publication by the staff of what I would consider a reliable source – RailFuture is notable enough to have its own Wikipedia article and is a fairly prominent advocacy group. The only other way to reference it would be a {{refn}} with the two timetables showing the change, but that seems a bit sloppy and like WP:SYNTH.
• What makes Disused Stations a reliable source?
  • Disused Stations is used quite widely on Wikipedia as a source. It is not self-published or wiki-like as the average person cannot contribute to it without that information being cleared by their editorial team. That level of independent scrutiny (as opposed to a blog or wiki) is what, in my opinion, makes it RS. The only crucial information it is used for is the relevant dates for Tempsford station; as a temporary instalment, it is omitted by R Butt. I could not find a DMY date for Holme hence the use of disused stations; the idea of it opening with the line is also verified by its own article.

• Other sources look fine for reliability.

Consistency

• Inconsistent use of archive links for websites.
• Inconsistent linking of websites and publishers. Note that WP:DUPLINK does not apply to reference sections.
• Inconsistent use of publisher parameter for book sources.
• Inconsistent casing of reference titles, please use sentence or title case per WP:CITEVAR.
  • Standardised to sentence case
• Inconsistent segmentation of ISBNs.
  • Standardised as 978-0000000000
• Inconsistent use of Govia Thameslink Railway vs. Great Northern for pages on the same website.
• Date format looks consistent.

Other comments

• Since you’ve used archive links, {{cite web}} presumes the links are dead. For those that are still live, please add |url-status=live.
• Ref 2: needs page number.
  • Not available via google books, hence the chapter no. as an alternative. Had a look and I can’t get it from a local library either.
• Ref 5: where are you seeing 31 March 2010 here? I can only see the month and year.
  • No idea, replaced with ‘march 2010’ per page 41.
• Ref 6: similarly, where are you seeing a date?
  • The map says “2 February 2025” on it when you open the pdf.
• Ref 8: ditto above.
  • 18 May 2025 was the most recent timetable change and when that one was released. GTR legally have to release a ‘new’ timetable twice a year even if all the train times are the same.
• Ref 10: where are you seeing an author.
  • No idea, think it was generated by Zotero and I didn’t realise
• Ref 11: gives a 404.
• Ref 12: link Railfuture.
• Ref 14: missing authors.
• Ref 15: June is not the date of publication, merely the latest news.
  • Removed (it’s updated since anyway)
• Ref 18: I think ISBN would suffice as far as identifiers go; can probably drop the “ltd.” from publisher.
• Ref 19: I would link Cambridgeshire Live.
• Ref 45: link London Transport (brand).
• Ref 46: missing author.
• Ref 47: no need to repeat British Transport Commission.
• Ref 51: missing page numbers.
  • Replaced with other references as I could not access the page numbers.

Sorry that it took so long – I have been very busy irl unfortunately. I’ve had some edit-conflict issues with myself (don’t ask) so just check it has all worked as I’m happy to redo any bits that haven’t come through. JacobTheRox^{(talk | contributions)} 21:07, 8 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ref 47: ISBN is throwing an error now. Still a bit uneasy on Disused Stations. Where do you see their editorial policy? I can only find an about page that seems to confirm this is self-published. If so, what makes Catford a SME? UpTheOctave! • 8^va? 13:55, 9 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Spotchecks will be done after these comments are dealt with, as some references may need to be removed. Best, UpTheOctave! • 8^va? 17:26, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Ref 1: pass
• Ref 5: pass
• Ref 6: pass
• Ref 10: fail, says nothing about Tempsford
• Ref 15: pass
• Ref 16: pass
• Ref 19: pass
• Ref 22: pass
• Ref 24: pass
• Ref 26: pass
• Ref 28: pass
• Ref 31: pass
• Ref 48: pass
• Ref 52: fail, date not found

Thanks, UpTheOctave! • 8^va? 14:18, 9 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@JacobTheRox: I fixed the ISBN error on ref 47, but I’m going to second UpTheOctave’s concern about Disused Stations. This really appears to be a group hobby site; they cite their sources, which is good, but I can’t find any proof of editorial policy (as opposed to whoever is on their facebook group being allowed to just write up a station and send it in to be listed as-is). I’m willing to be persuaded if you can find some indication of reliability (editorial policy, being cited in RSs, etc.) —PresN 01:35, 18 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have replaced Trumpington’s Disused Stations reference with a book that is (probably) more reliable. I can’t find anything else on Holme on the internet however hard I try, and Butt’s Directory of Railway Stations does not even give an opening year. I think it is better to have an opening date from a source with slightly lower editorial standards than no opening date at all. JacobTheRox^{(talk | contributions)} 10:06, 18 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @JacobTheRox, few final issues:

• It looks like refs 6 and 9 are duplicate now; they should be combined
• Refs 20 and 53 are also duplicate
• Refs 1, 12, 13, 14, 22, 25, 26, 28, 29, 30, 31, 36, 37, 38, 39 and 44 still have no archive links
• Butt (1995) still has a location
• Per WP:V, I consider this discussion a challenge to the verifiability of the Holme station opening date. As such, unless you can find a reliable source, I will not pass this review unless the opening date is removed. I’d recommend looking at historical newspapers in Norfolk and Cambridgeshire; the BNA would be useful for this.

UpTheOctave! • 8^va? 15:31, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• “Great Northern manage all except eight…” I would rephrase as “Great Northern manages…” (the company is a collective singular).
• You might choose to explain what Grade I and Grade II signify with regard to Listed buildings. Readers shouldn’t have to navigate to another page to understand the basics of this distinction.
• The table appears to be nicely set up with great photos where available.

User:JacobTheRox: This is a very interesting list! Bgsu98 (Talk) 13:36, 7 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Hopefully we’ll see future lists like this one come through FLC. 😃 Bgsu98 (Talk) 15:24, 9 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]