Talk:Dover MRT station

Dover MRT station is currently a Transport good article nominee. Nominated by ZKang123 (talk) at 06:16, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

An editor has indicated a willingness to review the article in accordance with the good article criteria. Further reviews are welcome from any editor who has not contributed significantly to this article (or nominated it), and can be added to the review page, but the decision whether or not to list the article as a good article should be left to the first reviewer.

Short description: Mass Rapid Transit station in Singapore

Trains: Stations / Rapid transit Mid‑importance

	Trains Portal
DYK	January 10, 2022

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Trains, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to rail transport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. See also: WikiProject Trains to do list and the Trains Portal.TrainsWikipedia:WikiProject TrainsTemplate:WikiProject Trainsrail transport articles

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated projects or task forces:
/
	This article is supported by WikiProject Stations.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Rapid transit.

Singapore Mid‑importance

	Singapore portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Singapore, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Singapore on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SingaporeWikipedia:WikiProject SingaporeTemplate:WikiProject SingaporeSingapore articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.

On 7 January 2018, it was proposed that this article be moved from Dover MRT Station to Dover MRT station. The result of the discussion was moved.

Where? :)[edit]

It's quite impressive that you can read into the second paragraph before receiving a hint as to where this station is! :) 138.37.199.206 08:28, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

don't quite get what you mean.. Chensiyuan 08:45, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, ok. Given proper intro in first line of first paragraph. —Sengkang 02:31, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:NS logo.jpg[edit]

Image:NS logo.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 23:52, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

First ever elevated station with side platforms?[edit]

I'm questioning the claim that this was "the first elevated station with two side platforms on either side of the tracks, as opposed to having a island platform in all other elevated stations." I'm sure there must be hundreds of earlier such stations across the world. 79.74.17.34 (talk) 17:28, 23 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sentence has been edited to remove Singapore-centric viewpoint. 리지강.wa.au _talk 16:26, 24 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Move discussion in progress[edit]

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Aljunied MRT Station which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 09:30, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Dover MRT station/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: ZKang123 (talk · contribs) 06:16, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: Gerald Waldo Luis (talk · contribs) 04:04, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey! I finally have the time to take a look at this, it should be a quick one. Gerald WL 04:04, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Per Dhoby Ghaut MRT station, I think it'd be best if the sentence has a "in Singapore" at the end, as a geographic qualifier. Yes there's SP at the next sentence but it doesn't hurt to be consistent.
- Fixed.--ZKang123 (talk) 13:13, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"Previous names Polytechnic"-- I think previous name is a misnomer, since technically it didn't open as Polytechnic station, rather it was just an initial plan. Also it'd be better if this info is also written in the history section.
- That's the only parameter for provisional names. Also mentioned in the lead, when the provisional name was first mentioned.--ZKang123 (talk) 13:13, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ref 1 website-- "SMRT Journeys"
- Fixed.--ZKang123 (talk) 13:13, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ref 13, 23: link website, add publisher to be consistent
- Fixed.--ZKang123 (talk) 13:13, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ref 14: link pub to be consistent
- Fixed.--ZKang123 (talk) 13:13, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ref 18: move web to pub, remove the abbreviation, link, to be consistent
- Fixed.--ZKang123 (talk) 13:13, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Is the Changi guide link necessary? AFAIK it was decided that it's redundant in some GAN or FAC.
- Removed.--ZKang123 (talk) 13:13, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Good Article review progress box

Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV ()

3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant ()

Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed