This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Canada: Ontario / Communities Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada 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.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Ontario. This article is supported by WikiProject Canadian communities. Cities This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cities, towns and various other settlements 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.CitiesWikipedia:WikiProject CitiesTemplate:WikiProject CitiesWikiProject Cities articles

This article is written in Canadian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, centre, travelled, realize, analyze) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Midway down the article an editor has added a Template:Infobox station. My understanding is that a specialized infobox like this should be added to an article about a train station, not tucked into the article about the city the station is located in (see Union Station (Toronto), Metro Prima MRT Station). I believe it should be removed, but seek the input of others. Thank you. Magnolia677 ( talk) 14:09, 28 July 2016 (UTC) reply

Is there a policy or a guideline around it? I notice that there was a discussion about something like this on the Lillooet page and the train station's article ended up being merged into the city's article there with an infobox like this. Air.light ( talk) 06:11, 29 July 2016 (UTC) reply

At WP:INFOBOXUSE it states that there are no rules for use of any infobox except discussion and consensus. I'd remove it, as it unbalances the article. Magnolia677 ( talk) 20:37, 29 July 2016 (UTC) reply

I agree in that I think it's a little bit much for the article for something which is not so significant. Retaining the photo could be nice for that section. Air.light ( talk) 00:42, 30 July 2016 (UTC) reply

I agree with the above. Mackensen (talk) 12:40, 24 November 2021 (UTC) reply