Talk:City Road tube stationの英語

Hi. At the moment, towards the end of the article, we say "Today little remains to indicate the site of the former station." But if we compare the article's main photo with the one here from 1915 and referenced in the article then it's obvious that this isn't quite right. The old photo's station structure going round the corner is the new photo's station structure going round the corner. We can see the same columns - one big one going round the corner and one to either side of it; we can see the decorative bands and the quite pretty little arcades of four small windows above those bands. OK, it's been bricked up to H*ll and beyond but it's right there in front of you. Now, I'm trying not to be rude and stroppy here (new motto - care less) but to be honest "Today little remains to indicate the site of the former station" is less accurate than "Today little remains to indicate the site of the former station well unless you count all that stuff you can see which is basically, er, a huge chunk of the former station plus a bonkers-looking tower and nine million tons of brick but yep, er, nothing to see here, move on."So I am worried that we are shortchanging our readers by markedly understating what there is to see there - there is really quite a good bit of old station to admire. I have done so. Is looking at a new photo (or even, dammit, the building itself?!) and comparing it with an old photo a sinful act of WP:OR? Probably, and if so please do just shoot me or something. But, seriously, what to do? If someone who is not me wants to have a go then great. Failing that, all I can think of to do - with regret, because it's a bit feeble really - is to fact-tag that statement and then remove it if/when it cannot be substantiated. Comments, please? Thanks and best wishes DBaK (talk) 17:49, 27 August 2010 (UTC)