Talk:Thessaloniki Metro

GA Review

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

Reviewer: 1.02 editor (talk · contribs) 10:01, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

Hi there i'll be taking this review. 1.02 editor (C651 set 217/218) 10:01, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

Review

Lead

• the lead is quite poorly phrased. "...is an underground rapid-transit system under construction in Greece, to serve the city of Thessaloniki" sounds odd, maybe "...is an underground rapid-transit system serving the city of Thessaloniki in Greece" or something similar would do. try to mention the fact that it is under construction to the section in the lead where it talks about the cost of the project.

I agree, it was recently changed. I will change it to "an underground rapid-transit system under construction in Thessaloniki, Greece's second-largest city". --Michail (blah) 13:22, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

• "Construction by a Greek-Italian consortium is overseen by Attiko Metro..." does the consortium have a name? it may be useful to include it.

As far as I'm aware it does not have a name. Attiko Metro supervises and represents the companies that have partnered up to build the system. --Michail (blah) 13:22, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

• "A request for tender will be issued for the western loop in the autumn of 2018." any update to this?

No update on this. How would you suggest this be treated? --Michail (blah) 13:22, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

maybe "A request for tender for the western loop was planned for release in the autumn of 2018." would work? the most important fact here is if the tender has been issued, as it will result in how the sentence will be phrased. 1.02 editor (C651 set 217/218) 02:29, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, I will reword it to that effect. --Michail (blah) 14:32, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

1910s and 1980s proposals

• i suggest removing or combining the first sentence of this section as it feels out of place.

I have merged them. --Michail (blah) 13:22, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

• is the low depth of the tunnels from the 1989 construction a good or bad thing as it is hard to tell from reading the sentence.

It is bad, as it would have disrupted the archaeological works. --Michail (blah) 13:22, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

• It ultimately failed, due to a series of..." -> "The project ultimately failed, due to a series of..."

Done. --Michail (blah) 13:22, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

• also it may be a good idea to change the year in the section name to the exact year since there is only 1 proposal per decade

I have changed it to 1918 and 1988 proposals. --Michail (blah) 13:22, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

Present System

• "Although Line 1 has been delayed..." Delayed by what?

Changed to Although Line 1 has been delayed by extensive archaeological works. --Michail (blah) 13:22, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

• "Line 1 runs within the municipality of Thessaloniki, the core of the Thessaloniki urban area." can you clarify which one is Thessaloniki city?

Thessaloniki refers to both the urban area and the Municipality (the core). The urban area is made up of 6 municipalities, including the Municipality of Thessaloniki, and one municipal unit (subdivision of a municipality). The city doesn't have a unified government. This map explains it better. --Michail (blah) 13:22, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification. 1.02 editor (C651 set 217/218) 02:29, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

• from what i read, i am assuming that line 2 is independent of line 1. is this correct?

This is what is being implied. The two will share tunnels, but Attiko Metro have specified that trains will run directly from Mikra to the New Railway Station, making it an independent line. That being said, we don't have that much information at the moment and the diagrams that are available show the phasing of the tunnels - they don't indicate lines. But like I said, Attiko Metro appears to treat it as an independent line going from the New Railway Station to Mikra and calling at all stations, as opposed to a line going from Mikra to 25 Martiou as implied by the diagrams. --Michail (blah) 13:22, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

• "A September 2018 Attiko Metro press release referred to "the two lines under construction"." what does this have to do with line 2?

This has to do with the confusion referred to above. It can be removed if you think it does not contribute. --Michail (blah) 13:22, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

I think it is better to remove it as it may confuse readers. 1.02 editor (C651 set 217/218) 02:29, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

Removed. --Michail (blah) 14:32, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

• maybe try to mention how many stations each line has, it is quite staple for all transport articles.

Done. --Michail (blah) 13:22, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

• in the future projects section there is another outdated sentence similar to the one in the lead which needs to be updated.

See response to that point. --Michail (blah) 13:22, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

Updated. --Michail (blah) 14:32, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

Rest of the article

• the first 2 sentences in the park and ride section can be combined to make it shorter.

Done. --Michail (blah) 13:22, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

• Also include the confirmed fare of the metro if there is one in the same section as the survey results.

No information on the actual fare is available. --Michail (blah) 13:22, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

• the information in the table for the archaeological finds at each station's location should be included at the station page and not here, only the major finds should be included here (which i note is already done)

Removed. --Michail (blah) 13:22, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

• gallery sections are generally discouraged from being put in articles and there is nothing extraordinary there so i suggest removing it (correct me if i'm wrong)

Removed. --Michail (blah) 13:22, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

• refs look ok, no copyvio or disambigs detected, no recent edit wars or issues with this page

Thanks for taking the time to review the article. Please note that I need to update the animated gif to take into account the updated timetable, I will let you know when that is done. I have also expanded the section on the depot, please be sure to take a look. --Michail (blah) 13:22, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

The new depot section looks fine, except the use of the word 'price tag' sounds odd in this context. 1.02 editor (C651 set 217/218) 02:29, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

Updated to and a total cost of. Also, I've updated the gif showing the evolution of the system to show the updated timetable of operation. --Michail (blah) 14:32, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

second look

• "Some finds discovered on the line, primarily at Venizelou, will make up the world's first open archaeological site in a metro station." this sentence is vague, is Venizelou the only station to feature this? if not then maybe mention the total or projected number of stations to feature this. Also, what are the finds mentioned in the sentence?

We don't know how many of the station will feature exhibits (presumably all of them that have had discoveries made during excavations), but Venizelou will be the only one to feature an archaeological site as opposed to a small archaeological museum. That is to say, the site will be left as it is for visitors to enter, similar to the acropolis, medieval catacombs, and other such archaeological sites. In Athens there is no such station, but there are stations with exhibits. This is different in the sense that it is not curated, it is what was found, as it was found, without disturbance. In Athens and other metro systems it is a curated collection put on display inside glass cases. Here, it will be open-air. We know from drawings how this will work, it will be publically accessible before entering the actual station, which will be below the archaeological site. I will reword this to make it clearer that there is a distinction between what happens at Venizelou and at the other stations. --Michail (blah) 14:32, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

• Just a suggestion here, but the future extensions section is rather small, so i suggest converting it to a subsection (level 3 header) and put it below the Line 2 subsection, which would also require the renaming of the 'Present system' section to just 'System'

I'll merge it with the section and call it System per your suggestion. --Michail (blah) 14:32, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

• The information regarding the rolling stock of the metro needs more content. Information such as the start date of construction and cost of the stock is missing.

I can't find that level of information, it's not publically available (not that I can find it at least). Is it necessary? --Michail (blah) 14:32, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

• it will be good if you can mention that the system uses third rail and the gauge of the track in prose and not just the infobox.

I will add this information in prose. --Michail (blah) 14:32, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

Comments

article looks good although phrasing is patchy, article length and coverage is good, there is an adequate level of depth in this article although there are certain aspects that could be improved. i am putting this on hold until the issues that i have identified have been resolved. Thanks 1.02 editor (C651 set 217/218) 11:20, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

@Philly boy92: I have replied to you on certain points that i feel still needs some work on. a second look through the article showed considerable improvement but i have also found some new areas which will need improvement and will list them above. 1.02 editor (C651 set 217/218) 02:29, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, let me know what you think after my second wave of revisions. --Michail (blah) 14:32, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

All the concerns raised has been addressed, and the current state of the article is in satisfactory condition, do note that the article should be promptly updated with more information when it becomes available. With that I will be passing this article. 1.02 editor (C651 set 217/218) 05:58, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

Line 2 stations

The list of stations for Line 2 don't bear any resemblance to Line 2 (Thessaloniki Metro). Either I'm confused or our articles are. Mackensen (talk) 12:22, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

It was recently decided that the old Line 2 (which ran parallel to Line 1 for 80% of its length) would just be part of Line 1, because the operator intends to create a separate Line 2. The Wikipedia articles have not been consistently updated to reflect this. Michail (blah) 02:14, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

@Mackensen even more confusingly, on the brand guidelines there are 2 lines shown, Line 1 from the New Railway Station to Nea Elvetia, and Line 2 from the New Railway Station to Mikra. I think we will have to wait and see how it functions when operational. Michail (blah) 13:15, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

Delete "in popular culture" section

With the operation of the Thessaloniki metro system imminent, the very last satyrical section seems quite outdated. It would be useful to include a few sentences regarding the repercussions of the consecutive delays on daily life in the city, but a paragraph with cringe jokes and references to people who are not relevant anymore is unnecessary. The section should be deleted. Goombario64 (talk) 15:16, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

Article rewrite, number of lines, colour scheme

I think the article is in a dire need of a rewrite. Over the years a lot of information which is procedural / historical has been accumulated, but that should really just be moved further down the article or to a separate article altogether, specifically about the history of the project. The Network section needs to be brought back in line with the WP:MOS. It seems to have been copied from the Greek WP, and it's very messy (for example it contains no fewer than 5 sections titled Line 1).

Apart from this, there number of lines in the system remains a mystery. Originally, it was stated that there would be two, but last year it was announced that both New Railway Station - Nea Elvetia and New Railway Station - Mikra would be Line 1, but on the branding guidelines the two are shown as Line 1 and Line 2. Signage from inside the stations also shows a red and a blue line, but doesn't explicitly say "line 1" and "line 2" (although that image is from last year). The maps inside the carriages only show the 13 stations of the red line. Platform signs are red and blue in stations served by lines 1 and 2 (such as Sintrivani), but only red at Voulgari and Nea Elvetia. Maybe the best thing to do is to wait until the system starts running to see how it functions in practice.

We also need to address the colour scheme. Currently we are using  #FF0000  and  #0070FF , but the brand guidelines use  #aa1f25  and  #243e8b . Michail (blah) 13:32, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

Line colour is something we have little control over: the de facto standard on Wikipedia is to follow (or be as close as possible to) the official colours, like what the Barcelona Metro, London Underground and the Paris Métro does. Athens and Thessaloniki currently piggybacks off London because none of the organisations behind the construction or operation of the Metro, Tram and Suburban Rail in Athens specified the exact line colour values for web or print, despite agreeing on a general colour scheme for identifying lines. --Minoa (talk) 02:08, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

@Minoa thanks. There is also something wrong with Template:Thessaloniki Metro within the infobox. Pinging the original creator, @Sv1xv , and I can see you have edited it in the past. The template causes all images to be pushed down the text to below the end of the template (sort of like Template:Clear), which distorts the layout of the article. Can you please look at what the issue is, because this does not happen to, for example, Athens Metro which also has a template in the infobox - if you add an image to its history section and set it to float on the left, it does not get pushed down. Any idea what is causing this? If it persists I recommend using an image file in the infobox and having the template within the body of the text where it will be less disruptive. Michail (blah) 14:57, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello, it's not {{Thessaloniki Metro}} that is causing it: the infobox is long because there is a lot of information in it. --Minoa (talk) 15:13, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

@Minoa Actually it isn't that either - it's the {{Template:Mapbox}}. It causes every image above it to be rendered below it. If you remove it the issue is fixed. In earlier versions it was at the top of the article, which is awkward. I'll have a think later on about how to better incorporate it so it doesn't interfere with images, unless you have any ideas. Michail (blah) 15:39, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

@Dimsar01 The inclusion of November 30, 2024 (2024-11-30) as opposed to just November 30, 2024 (2024-11-30) in the infobox is unnecessary, and the assertion that {{Template:Start date and age}} is used on "all other" metro system pages is not true. It is not used on Copenhagen Metro, Stockholm Metro, Brescia Metro, Metrovalencia, and others. It is unnecessary information to begin with (people know when 30 November 2024 was, and age is used on systems that opened decades ago), and it also results in the word "ago" being clipped into a new line by itself due to the width of the infobox. Infoboxes should only contain basic information that is necessary at a glance. That it opened 0 days ago (or 100 days ago) is not necessary information for a reader. Michail (blah) 14:09, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

Recent edit re fake inauguration

I reverted a recent edit by @Firefoxer57983, which added a whole paragraph about Alexis Tsipras. There are numerous things I find controversial about this edit, not least its editorial style which contradicts WP:EDITORIAL. At best this event could potentially need a single line of text in line with WP:WEIGHT, but it's quite obvious Syriza-bashing as it stands. Some claims are presented as facts:

• organized an early inauguration of the metro
• also to highlight the supposed completion of the project over the last 3.5 years of Syriza's government, for a project that has been underway for 20 years
• that all this is done for electoral purposes to highlight a project that has been going on for 20 years, but also for the low percentages in the latest polls received by Syriza in Macedonia, but also in Thessaloniki, due to the signing of the Prespa Agreement.

The sources it uses are also problematic as they are not newspapers with an established track record. One of them, iefimerida, has had its owner found guilty of defaming Syriza politicians journalists he doesn't like through articles on the website, as well as a former Prime Minister. in.gr and LiFO are also on very thin ice in my book and they should only be used as a source 'of last resort'. Please remember to keep all sources reliable, the tone neutral, and the writing encyclopaedic. Also please note this article is written in British English; in line with MOS:RETAIN it should stay this way unless there is broad consensus to move to American.

Also the paragraph is in the wrong place in the article chronologically. It is placed immediately after 2002 and introduces events from 2018, but the section after this controversial edit jumps back to 2003. Michail (blah) 01:37, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

Also two CNN Greece articles are used as a source for the claim for the low percentages in the latest polls received by Syriza in Macedonia, but also in Thessaloniki, due to the signing of the Prespa Agreement, but this is not mentioned at all in the articles [1] [2]. Best match is the last section of the second article about a "group of people" who "protested in front of the Ministry for Macedonia and Thrace" and "were shouting that Alexis Tsipras is not welcome in the city". Michail (blah) 02:15, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

Hello, thanks for letting me know about the paragraph I added. First I would like to say that maybe my English is not that good so I hope you understand what I'm talking about :) I would like to rewrite the paragraph with more reliable sources and in a more neutral way, maybe the reason of a non-neutral tone is based on the translations I did from the articles. I didn't know about iefimerida, but the same things are happening all the time between currect governments, politicians and journalists leaning on the other side of the political spectrum, after all efsyn, just like you are citing, has one of the most non-neutral tone written articles. And, for example, efsyn disputed photographs showing then-Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras on a private yacht at the time of the 2018 Attica wildfires. So I don't know whether the articles you mentioned are that trustworthy. Anyway, this is not the current topic and this is happening between news medias all the time. I would like to answer respectivelly to all the things you believe it's not factual:

• The Tsipras government made an early inauguration, all the articles are citing this and political parties from all the political spectrum supported this statement (PASOK-KINAL, ND, KKE, Potami etc), I can add more articles if it is necessary. I don't know how this is not clear, just because Syriza-friendly media is not cited in the paragraph, doesn't mean it's not real.

• I understand this is not well written, but this doesn't make the rest of the paragraph non factual to be deleted as a whole. Make it more neutral, don't competelly erase events.

• For this statement I forgot to add the source, it's from the Makedonia newspaper (makthes.gr) [A protest against the Prespa Agreement was held by a group of people outside the Ministry of Macedonia and Thrace]. I added the 2 CNN articles because they are referring too to the incident, not the reason why it happened just like Makedonia newspaper, one of the oldest newspapers in Greece. Also, there were a lot of anti-government incidents in Northern Greece in 2018-2019 because of the Prespa Agreement.

And for the non-chronological continuum of the paragraph because the next paragraph starts with 2003, that's why i added it in the "History" section of the wiki article and not in the "Final proposal" section. If you believe it should be placed somewhere else please let me know :) Firefoxer57983 (talk) 09:25, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

I don't think this requires a paragraph; a passing mention maybe, but certainly not 4,800 characters worth of commentary.

• The Tsipras government made an early inauguration, all the articles are citing this - this is not true. Half the articles state that Tsipras inaugurated a metro station.
• political parties from all the political spectrum supported this statement - political parties are biased; they have a vested interest in sensationalism. The one sentence that may warrant inclusion in the article in line with WP:WEIGHT could include something along the lines of "was accused by opposition parties of", but including a whole paragraph of text whose content is almost exclusively sourced from political party press releases is not in line with WP:RELIABLE.
• For this statement I forgot to add the source, it's from the Makedonia newspaper - ok but the source still doesn't support the original quote that this is done for electoral purposes to highlight a project that has been going on for 20 years, but also for the low percentages in the latest polls received by Syriza in Macedonia, but also in Thessaloniki, due to the signing of the Prespa Agreement. The source only states a protest happened. The CNN article states that the protesters were "removed by police" and doesn't mention any clashes, implying it was a small protest. Again WP:WEIGHT is important here.
• Also, there were a lot of anti-government incidents in Northern Greece in 2018-2019 because of the Prespa Agreement. - this is irrelevant to the scope of this article.
• And, for example, efsyn disputed photographs showing then-Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras on a private yacht - this is whataboutism, "disputing photographs" is not the same as being found liable for defamation by a court of law (twice three times).
• maybe my English is not that good - we encourage users with all levels of English proficiency to contribute, my point had to do with spelling, which in this article is done in British English and needs to be consistent (polarisation, not polarization, etc). You can consult MOS:ENGVAR for more :)

Michail (blah) 13:35, 11 December 2024 (UTC)