Talk:Barca d'Alva railway station

GA Review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

This review is transcluded from Talk:Barca d'Alva railway station/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Pi.1415926535 (talk · contribs) 07:08, 11 February 2024 (UTC)

This article is thoroughly researched and clearly has potential to reach Good Article status. However, it is not there yet, and needs more improvement than can reasonably be expected during a GA review. Two of the Good Article criteria are not met:

• 1a (the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct): As indicated by the cleanup banner, the translation quality here is not sufficient for GA. For example, there are untranslated phrases like Real orden, mistranslations like automotives, and awkward wording like was re-established and it was also reopened.
• 1b (it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections...: Two sentences is not a sufficient lede for a 2,500-word article, and it does not accurately summarize the article.

There are also issues with criteria 2c (several unsourced statements/quotes) and 3a (no information about the station building itself).

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Rough translation banner

I have attempted to address the issues of the rough translation banner. In this I have been severely hampered by the fact that reference 4 (Sousa, 16 September 1927) which is used 21 times within the article, no longer appears to be online. It has not been archived on the Wayback machine, as every attempt since 2016 reports "Page Not Found". I have been attempting to improve the grammar by looking at what the Portuguese sources actually say, rather than the translations from the Portuguese wiki article. If anyone cares to comment on what has been achieved so far, I would be grateful of feedback. Bob1960evens (talk) 18:16, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello Bob, thank you for your work! I came across this article/the good article nomination and decided to also give it a go at improving the language in it and attempt to improve some wikilinks. So far I've only gone through the first paragraphs, but I'll resume once I've had more time :).

Otherwise, regarding the source that is unavailable, I contacted the online library about it, in case they can assist in locating an online copy of the article. I'll let you know if they get back to me. FilipeMRGouveia (talk) 15:05, 17 July 2025 (UTC)

For the record, I contacted Hemeroteca and Biblioteca Nacional de Portugal. The first confirmed they don't have it available, while the second says that their copy of the railway gazette has been taken away for digitization (scanning). They told me it'll probably take a while until they have digitized the documented. FilipeMRGouveia (talk) 14:52, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

I have now gone through the entire article and fixed the mistranslations and checked with original sources to correct some mistakes and inconsistencies in the writing. I have now removed the rough translation banner, since I felt it was no longer needed, though if anyone feels differently, feel free to add it back. FilipeMRGouveia (talk) 08:48, 27 July 2025 (UTC)